Fathers Responsible for Children's Health Insurance

In most states that I have been aware of, when the mother's child support case is handled through Child Support Enforcement (CSE) (mainly when she receives any type of welfare benefits), the father is made responsible for covering the children's health insurance. In my own experience, this was not specifically enforced and the kid just got Medicaid anyway--no money out of my pocket. If there happened to be past/ongoing medical bills, that expense was calculated into the child support formula if mother had been paying it.

But here's another case.

Father and Mother reside in different states.
Children live with the mother.
Father pays child support.
Father is responsible for health insurance.
Mother takes the children to the doc for xyz and pays a decent co-pay.
Mother finds out shortly afterward, that father's health coverage has a $3000 deductible (before ANY health coverage is paid, and thereafter 80% is paid), of which, $0 has been paid thus far.
Children are NOT eligible for Medicaid because the father has them "covered."
Mother cannot afford to buy health insurance for herself or her children.


This is considered reasonable?

Not to mention father was fully aware of his coverage all along.
Not to mention the father is dragging his feet in providing necessary information regarding the insurance company and plan.
Not to mention the insurance company will NOT talk to the mother because she isn't the policy holder.


Sheesh! Read more!

Sphere: Related Content

The Withdrawal Method a.k.a Pulling Out Does Work, for me

Yes, I'm really about to talk about the withdrawal method aka pulling out. I've recently written about abortion, so I might as well amp it up a bit. Please read on if you have an open mind only. I don't care if you call me all types of whore, nasty, trifflin, or whateva; I'm going to tell you what I know. I'm really upset about the comments I've read on Bianca I. Laureano's post on RH Reality Check.

My partners and I have effectively utilized the withdrawal method for more than a decade. This began when I was a teen. Yes, partners with an "s." And effectively as in no pregnancy occurred. And believe you me I have had zero problems with conceiving. Withdrawal wasn't appropriate or even desired in every relationship. The decision wasn't always made far in advance. No, I don't have a latex allergy (though I think it is rare that people actually do) but I am sensitive to it...especially certain condom brands, and nonoxynol 9. Do you know what it does to me? It makes me feel raw.....it is a hot feeling...irritated...swollen...dry...itchy sometimes. It throws my vaginal ph off sometimes, too, causing bacterial vaginosis, which may then cause yeast to overgrow, or vice versa. This kinda kills the post sex orgasmic high. You know what else sucks, feeling nauseous like I'm pregnant while on the birth control pill. Having major migraine attacks while on the shot (although the lack of regular menstrual flow was a plus as far as sex frequency was concerned).

I have had women say to me that I am so lucky as to not have ever had a pregnancy scare while utilizing this method. My answer is that the men that I have been with are responsible and as serious about my not getting pregnant as I am. This is the only way this can ever work. If you are a woman who really doesn't care if she gets pregnant or not, withdrawal may not be for you. If your partner doesn't care if you get pregnant or not, then withdrawal is sure as hell not for you. The man has to care! He has to give a fuck about his life AND yours. And you have to be selective about who you let enjoy the fruits of your pussy! But let me explain why this is a joint effort...

The man must know when to pull the dick out. This must occur prior to ejaculation. Only he knows what this exact point is and he must have it down to a science. There is no,

Oh baby, oh baby, I'm about to cum....oh...whoops...my bad.

If he does say this (well, the first part only), because you both like the explicit bedroom talk, you, as the woman, also should be prepared to either stop moving, maybe even push him away, or hop off the dick yourself. If you know this man and his bodily actions, you can pay attention to his strokes and mannerisms and prepare yourself. But you must be paying attention!!! This doesn't mean that you're not enjoying the sexual experience. You're actually enjoying it more because you and your partner are attuned to each other. This is the ultimate sexual pleasure!!!!

Do not deny women this method of birth control. Do not ridicule women. Discuss time and place issues...pros and cons...emergencies. The woman being abused and subjected to marital/partner sexual abuse/rape may be able to utilize this. How? Some men like the porno images of cum shots and skeeting all over their partner's body. This requires withdrawal. No sperm in the vagina equals no pregnancy and the woman may be able to passively facilitate this course of action.

Everybody is always talking about they know someone who has gotten pregnant using withdrawal. What can we really know about that couple's sexual practices? No more than we know about the sexual practices of heterosexual persons who contract HIV/AIDS. Research is inconclusive as to whether or not there is sperm in pre-cum, or whether there is functional sperm. Those of us who have been effectively using the withdrawal method haven't exactly been advertising it for various reasons which become obvious after reading the comments on posts like Bianca's and several others on RH Reality Check. And while "promoting" this to teens may not seem idealistic, we have to realize that we are dealing with sex...something that is, or can be, free, fun, and spontaneous...there is not always room for idealism. We are assuming that most teens are not capable of this, however that notion comes with the assumption that some teens are not adequately sexually experienced. This same notion can be applied to grown folks, too. Think of the newly married previous virgins...What sexual experience do they have? Or those that have had sex only a handful of times...????

On another note--We seriously need to get off this image of conniving women poking holes in condoms and/or stealing men's sperm. Unless a man is being restricted in some way, withdrawal is and always has been an option.

Some helpful stuff:

Maybe it helps to have partner that is experienced in masturbation--men and women. Men so that they know their body's responses including timing, women so that they know:

1. no dick-in-pussy is required for orgasm--the clitoris can stand alone
2. male and female orgasms are not automatically simultaneous
3. sex doesn't have to end with the male orgasm

Maybe it helps to teach women and men full detail about the menstrual cycle. And maybe if you are in a sexually intimate relationship, you should divulge information about your menses to your partner. Yes, it is personal, but so is sex.

Maybe it would help to practice pulling out while there is another method of birth control in effect (I've had a partner withdraw with the condom on. At the time, I thought it was odd, however, I realized it was a sure fire way to prevent pregnancy.).

Maybe you shouldn't have sex with a partner who has several children already, especially if they are really young, but more so if their ages are consecutive. Pay attention to patterns.

Look, I'm not trying to convince anyone to use the withdrawal method. You should do what you feel comfortable with. Just don't knock those of us who do it and do it well.


Read more!

Sphere: Related Content

What Australia Says About Shared Parenting

H/T Janet Langjahr

Okay, folks, this isn't news, really. This isn't groundbreaking. People who deal with children....have been dealing with children....People who are genuinely interesting in CHILDREN'S well-being already know what they need. And it doesn't involve flipping back and forth and accommodating the needs of their parents. The father's rights camps, joined by some women's groups, have been pushing hard for the splitting of children just like property under the guise that both parents, equally, is what children need. Bah humbug. There is no credible study that say that children need a father at any specific percentage during the day, week, or weekend. Gimmie a fucking break already.

Most men do not fight their babymamas for child custody, especially child custody that attempts to remove the child completely from mom's care. They don't do this because they know that mom is and has been taking care of the child[ren] in a way that they don't, or can't. That is what is normal. These are men.

On the other hand, ladies, please question the man that so avidly wants custody of his child[ren]...because it may not be all night and shining armor daddy of the year. Think hard about it. Think if he were to do the same thing to you later on. Don't let him tell you that bullshit about how much the babymama is a crackhead...whore...crazy....lesbian...or whatever the word of the day is for him. Something is usually wrong with that picture. Think harder about it. I'm so serious. What father wants to take his breastfeeding baby away from the mother? What father wants his infant spending overnights back and forth and being passed here and there? Would you want this for your own baby...toddler...preschooler? (And I wouldn't even limit it to these young ones.)

Infants struggle in shared care: Report

Children aged under four and school aged children could be put at risk developmentally through shared parenting arrangements following separation, two new La Trobe University/Family Transitions reports show.

Commissioned by the Australian Government Attorney General’s Department, the findings are the latest in a series of reports into the impacts on children of divorce.

The implications of the findings show that greater thought needs to be taken by courts and mediators about parenting arrangements, particularly of very young children, said research team leader Associate Professor Jennifer McIntosh, clinical psychologist, from La Trobe University’s School of Public Health and Family Transitions.

‘Our findings show conclusively that rigid arrangements of any kind, often fuelled by acrimony and poor cooperation, and set out in court orders, are associated with higher depressive and anxiety symptoms in children and this form of living became something children often sought to change,’ she said.

‘A cooperative parental relationship and a history of warm, active parenting before separation are key to school aged children doing well in any care arrangement,’ she added.

According to Associate Professor McIntosh, the study findings imply that shared care – when children stay overnight with the non-resident parent five nights or more a fortnight – for very young children should not normally be starting point for discussions about parenting arrangements.

‘The negative impact on the emotional and behavioural functioning of this age group is significant,’ Associate Professor McIntosh said.

The first study, which focused on school aged children in high conflict separation situations, sampled 131 families (260 children), and followed up with personal interviews over four years after divorce mediation.

The study found that shared care arrangements were less stable over time than primary care arrangements, and that rigid arrangements had a significant impact on children and mothers but not fathers.

‘Children living in rigidly fixed shared arrangements were most likely to want a change in the arrangement, reported most frequent conflict between parents and expressed feelings of being caught in the middle,’ said Associate Professor McIntosh.

While type of care arrangement did not predict overall mental health of the child, living in shared care over 3–4 years was associated with greater difficulties in attention, concentration and task completion. Boys in rigidly sustained shared care were most likely to have Hyperactivity/Inattention scores in the clinical/borderline range.

‘Fathers with shared care arrangements were the most satisfied with the arrangement, despite reporting higher levels of ongoing conflict about parenting and poorer dispute management,’ she said.

The second study investigated infants and toddlers in separated families using data from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children.

In infants under two, the study showed that overnight care with the non-resident parent once or more a week was independently associated with high irritability and more vigilant efforts by the infant to watch and stay near the resident parent.

In children aged two to three, shared care at five or more nights per fortnight was associated with lower levels of persistence –playing continuously, staying with tasks, practicing new skills, coping with interruption - and more problematic behaviour - crying or hanging on to the resident parent, high anxiety, being frequently upset; eating disturbances and aggressive behaviour.

In this general population sample, for children aged between four to five, independent effects of any care arrangement on emotional and behavioural regulation outcomes were no longer evident. The vast majority of behavioural and emotional disturbance seen in this age group was accounted for by inter-parental conflict and lack of warmth in parenting.

Collaborating researchers included Associate Professor Bruce Smyth, Australian National University; Associate Professor Margaret Kelaher, University of Melbourne; Professor Yvonne Wells, La Trobe University and Caroline Long, Family Transitions.

Who does shared parenting benefit? Fathers, more specificially Abusive men. Controlling men. Men who still want to be a part of their ex's life as much as possible...sometimes because he can't let go....or he might just want to make her as miserable as possible...or maybe he's still in love with her and he might still be trying to tap that ass on the side. Read more!

Sphere: Related Content

Felony Charges for Past Due Child Support

UPDATED AGAIN 7/30, 7/31

H/T Janet Langjahr

Most women I know, including myself, receive child support. Additionally, most women that I know, do not receive the court-ordered amount of child support. So what happens? We get by by whatever means necessary. As for these fathers, at least as far as Florida Child Support Enforcement (CSE) is concerned: At 30 days, CSE can suspend the father's driver's license...emphasis on "can."

What does that really do?

Well, it won't stop him from driving if he wants to or needs to drive. It will get him to paying some fees if he wants his license restored, but the child support "problem" has to be taken care of first. (This is all based on the fact that he has a license, because he might not).

How does he take care of the problem if there is past due child support? Isn't it past due because he couldn't pay it?

I'm glad you asked. In Florida, he can go on down to the CSE office and make a payment arrangement.

What did you say?

A payment arrangement, you know, like when your electricity bill is late and steady accumulating but you need to keep the power on so you make an agreement to pay a little something-something in installments?...Something like that. The father agrees to pay the debt by making an arrangement. Yes, I know this is odd because he already has an arrangement to pay child support on a monthly basis.

And so the full child support amount isn't getting paid on a regular basis, what does CSE do?

I'm glad you asked. The answer is, nothing. Yes, that is indeed what the CSE representative told me...they don't do a damn thing. As long as he's paying something, there's nothing further they are going to do....except...garnish his federal tax return come the following year. Oh yeah! You will get a lump sum payment of the debt (maybe not all of it, but most of it...granted you didn't receive any cash assistance, because then the State will get paid first) next year. Oh yeah, that's if he doesn't owe any other debts, like student loans...and of course his other babymamas. If so, you'll have to split the profits debt, or maybe you'll just have to wait your turn. This is all assuming he files a tax return though.

I have heard of few men who have gone to jail for child support debt/arrears/arrearage. The men that I have known to do so were found on the street, or something similar, doing something else (illegal, or not non illegal), and the popo ran their name on their license and found other stuff, and hence they were arrested and brought in under child support charges either in addition to, or in place of, whatever the popo originally stopped them for.

So how do these fathers resolve the situation after getting arrested?

I'm glad you asked. The fathers can pay a purge to the court. I'm not quite sure what that means because I have no direct experience with that--but from what I've heard, the father presents in front of the judge and then pays like $100, and it is all over with. No, the child support debt isn't erased*, it's more like he's making a good faith deposit on it.

One more thing, child support debt can go on the credit report...all three bureaus. Unfortunately, from what I have observed, many credit granting institutions really don't give a shit.

Back in my youth, I used to think it was all cool that fathers were sent to jail for failing to pay their child support. There were just so many fathers doing it. I mean, it was seriously like the thing to do...NOT pay your child support BUT continue fucking around and making more babies with different women. I thought the only way to stop this madness, short of a male birth control, was to throw their asses in jail. And then one day I woke up and realized,

How the hell are they going to pay their child support in jail?

But you see, I'm referring to poor men. Or maybe not poor men per se, men who do not have a job, or are un[der]employed, maybe that's a better description. You must remember that non poor men, men with jobs, men with good ass jobs, don't pay their child support, too, sometimes. And it is on purpose. Some men work under the table, to avoid paying...some men change jobs frequently, to avoid it...some men move out of the state, to avoid...and some men just refuse to work...This is who I imagine that jail is supposed to be for. It is supposed to serve as their wake-up call.

Now the menz groups like to turn all this on its head and say that mothers are the largest group of folk not paying their child support. What kinda mothers are these? Were these mothers formerly employed and are now just acting like the menz? Or were these mothers stay at homes who, because of circumstances (ie court battle and loss of custody) are now just getting [back] into the workforce in low-paying jobs? There is a difference.

The menz always say to women,

Why do yall bitches get pregnant from these no good ass mofos with no jobs and expect them to be supportin your chilluns?

I ask the menz,

Why do yall mofos be getting bitches pregnant who want to stay at home with their children and not work outside the home?

In the meantime:

Marshall woman accused of failing to pay child support

Friday, July 9, 2010
PAT NOLAN, Staff Writer

A criminal summons has been issued for a Marshall woman for failing to pay child support.

Billie J. Weathers, 39, is charged with two counts of nonsupport, a class D felony.

According to the probable cause statement, Weathers was ordered to pay $325 per month in child support for two minor children. As of June 30, the total due exceeded the total of 12 monthly payments.

If convicted, Weathers faces up to four years in the Department of Corrections, or one year in the county jail and/or up to a $5,000 fine per count.

Charges contained in reports provided by law enforcement officials are not evidence of guilt. Evidence supporting charges must be presented before a jury, whose duty is to determine if the accused is guilty or not guilty of the charges.

FELONY CHARGES???!!!

And so we have a woman who must have a pretty low income to be ordered to pay that amount for two children. And apparently more than $4200 has accrued in arrears. And so, in the State of Missouri, this woman will possibly have an arrest record and felony charges attached to her name. If she can't come up with the money, she could spend time in prison (coincidentally, where she will not be earning any money); if she does come up with the money, she could spend less time in prison and then pay up to $10K on top of the arrears.

Who gets the fine money?

What kind of post-prison employment do felons get? (surely this won't get the kids any higher-level type of support not to mention probably not getting to visit mom in prison.)

And WHO initiated this court action? (I highly doubt it is a welfare case and that CSE is involved).

All the women I know have had at least this amount of arrears owed to them. We all just wait on the tax return...each year...and sometimes for years. We wouldn't even want the "father" in prison because there definitely would be no tax return to collect.


*Speaking of erasing debt. I have seen the family court system erase child support debt for various reasons (none of them good, likely not even legal). It is a very interesting (to say the least) experience watching all that money that was owed to the children, go down the drain, like it never existed. Money you could've used to buy socks and hairbows and shit, fieldtrips and deodorant and shit, or even piano lessons and braces and shit. I have seen child support arrears negotiated for other things ie you agree to waive the arrears, and the father agrees to "give you" full custody (since custody is now "shared" in Florida since 2008, read: Gender Bias in Florida's Court System, Shared Parental Responsibility), and other shit like that.

Additionally, in Florida, interest can be added to child support arrears...obviously adding more debt to what the father already owes. However, I have seen family court judges not allow interest even though State law says so.

My advice to women concerning child support (if you're on the receiving end) can be found here. Look ladies, the child support system isn't as simple as you think it is. It has morphed into an agency that's goal is to meddle in your home life and possible split your children half, or wholly away from you...in the name of fatherhood. Please take my word for it. Or, not:

The Purpose of Child Support Enforcement

I'm providing this information, which is public, just in case anyone wasn't clear on the intent of child support run by the gub'ment (emphasis mine):

Child Support Enforcement

The Child Support Enforcement Program provides four major services to our customers:

locating non-custodial parents,
establishing paternity,
establishing support orders and
collecting support payments.

The program also provides services to non-custodial parents. States offer access and visitation services through federal grants...

Read Also:

DHHS, Responsible Fatherhood, the Family Court: Your Tax Dollars Being Wasted On an Illegal Hype

Legislation to Help Deadbeat Dads Get Back in Control of Their Families

Read more!

Sphere: Related Content

How Phyllis Schlafly REALLY Feels: "the blacks" and "unmarried women" should beware

Thanks to RH Reality Check for bringing this to my attention. Phyllis Schlafly said,

"One of the things Obama's been doing is deliberately trying to increase the percentage of our population that is dependent on government...For example, do you know what was the second biggest demographic group that voted for Obama? Obviously the blacks were the biggest demographic, yall know what was the second biggest? Unmarried women. 70% of unmarried women voted for Obama. And this is because when you kick your husband out, you've got to have Big Brother Government to be your provider. And they know that. They've admitted it. And they have all kinds of bills to continue to subsidize illegitimacy, which is now nationwide, running at 41%. 1.7 million babies were born in our country illegitimately last year. The Obama administration wants to continue to subsidize this group because they know they are Democratic votes. Republicans never could have given the amount of money they are going to get. And as Ronald Reagan said, if you subsidize something you are going to get more of it, and if you tax it you're going to get less of it.

*sighing* Here I go:

1. Raise your hand if you are poor and you WANT to be dependent on the government?

2. Who the fuck are "the blacks?"

3. Raise your hand if you are Black and you did NOT vote for Obama (Schlafly isn't talking about you though).

4. Raise your hand if you are Black and NOW you wish you did not vote for Obama (I'm just curious).

5. Who the fuck are unmarried women? Does your teenaged daughter count? If you're married but separated, do you count? If you're married but you or your husband are fucking around, do you count? If you're engaged, you might not count. If you're recently divorce you might count. Why the hell is everyone up in your relationship business?

6a. How many of you unmarried women kicked your husband out?

b. And how many of you did that just for shitz and giggles?

c. And how many of you did that you so could sign up for Obama and his friends to support you and your children?


If you're single and with or without children, you should now know, if you didn't know before, that people like Phyllis Schlafly (Ann Coulter would fit in this category) don't give a flying fuck about you and yours all the while they feign concern about the children whilst taking away funding from programs that give kids a chance to do things with their lives besides fucking and engaging in violence (immediate, free gratification). Read more!

Sphere: Related Content