Child Support

Today, I just want to point out a major flaw in the U.S. child support system.  I have a friend who divorced her abusive husband very shortly after getting pregnant.  I am not going to bore you with the stories of the emotional abuse from him and his family during and after the birth, but I will mention that the husband was provided with DNA evidence that the child was his.  Recently, some five months after the birth, he finally announced that he has no intention of paying child support (prior to this it was always "next month I will start").  She has been raising their child on a very small income with no support from the father for almost half a year, and she is currently in a very difficult financial situation as a result.  Child support laws won't even give her any recourse for another month, and she is will still not see any of the money for another 2 to 3 months.  This is not a unique story.  There are children all over the U.S. who have been financially abandoned by their fathers, and the children and mothers have to suffer for almost a year to see any justice.

U.S. child support needs some massive revisions.  First, fathers should not be paying directly to the mothers, and they should not be paying through a middle man that only forwards the payment if it is received.  This is essentially the state telling mothers and children that they can just rot and die if the fathers don't pay.  Six months is far too long to wait before taking action.  Who deserves survival more, a deadbeat dad who abandoned his kid, or the kid who did nothing wrong?

It would only take one thing to make a huge difference: Instead of mom only getting the money if dad will pay it, the government should do the paying.  The government should pay mom her child support every month, on time, and in full.  Then, the government should send dad the bill.  If dad does not pay, mom should not have to report him or file for recourse.  In fact, she really should not even have to know.  If the government wants to wait six months before garnishing wages, that should be its own business, and it should feel the sting of a light pocket book, because the government made the law, and the government can afford it much better.

Before closing, I want to avoid some misunderstandings.  I realize that sometimes moms abandon their children when the fathers get custody.  This applies equally to them.  I presented this way, because a very vast majority of divorces find the children with the mother, while the father is ordered to pay child support.

The point here is, regardless of which parent has the child, it is beyond cruel and irresponsible to leave the financial support of the child entirely in the hands of someone who's commitment is questionable.  If the government is going to order that child support be paid, the government should be responsible for enforcing that order in a way that does not cause suffering for the child.  If the government is not capable of forcing all payments to be made in full and on time, it should take on the responsibility of making the payments regardless of whether the debt has been paid, and it should take sole responsibility of collecting the debt.  We no longer live in an era where doing this is far too expensive to be feasible.  It can and should be done, because we are not just talking about the well being of our children.  We are talking about our future society.  If we cannot make sure that our children do not have to suffer in poverty needlessly, our nation is going to go backwards, not forwards.  Even if you are too selfish to care about this, consider who is going to care for you when you get old, when a vast majority of Americans are in poverty.