|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deadbeat moms exist too
To the editor, I'm sorry, but as a single custodial father, I just had to react a little to Nancy Knox's diatribe in Friday's Wildcat.. Though most single custodial parents are women, the emphasis that she chooses to show is rather unfortunate. First of all, women are twice as likely to default on child support than men, according to statistics. A lot of this is because women make less money and are less able to pay, but that, according to Ms. Knox, is no excuse. Women get custody in 90 percent of cases because men are usually under the impression that they will never receive custody, so they rarely try for it. In cases in which men request custody, they get it more than 70 percent of the time. And those women who don't get custody are usually upset. Why? Because the children are the important thing in this equation. My son's mother has had nothing to do with him since he was eight-months-old; he will be nine in April. My son's mother has sent a grand total of $610 over eight years, and he has gotten two Christmas gifts and no birthday gifts during that time. Since she was ordered to pay a little over $300 a month four years ago and was also ordered to pay back support for two years prior to that, she is just as deadbeat as any dad out there. Now, I usually support women in this situation, and I argue their case pretty strongly. But Ms. Knox does no one a favor by crying "poor me." While I would strongly urge her to do as I have for many years and work to reform support enforcement, it does little or no good to whine about how much your ex is in arrears, and it certainly does no good to practically label it a "male" thing and disregard the fact that men in the same position are just as unfortunate as women. The fact that he is number three in Pima County is irrelevant. She should have (and probably did) written him off long ago and learned how to adapt to the situation. I would strongly suggest that Ms. Knox immerse herself in her studies and her child and stop worrying about what will never be and concentrate on what is. Her child is the most important thing in her life and while it would be nice to have more money (as is always the case), it's better to love the child and do what you can to provide for it, than to sit around and kvetch about what you don't have. I have my son. My ex doesn't have my son. In the last five years, I earned an Associates Degree and am about six units from a Bachelor's. I landed a very good job with a large law firm which may pay my way to law school. I simply decided a long time ago that I could sit around and be angry about my plight, or I could do something about it. Guess which one I chose? By the way, I am not disagreeing about enforcement. It is horrid, to say the least. And the Republicans in Congress keep blocking every attempt to shore up the problem. And I advise everyone to plug away and help fix the problem. It can be fixed and should be. But don't take your eyes off the prize. The real prize is your children. You can raise them in a sea of love or in a sea of resentment. Guess which one will serve them best in the long run? Ms. Knox mentions in her article that her children are very resilient. I suggest she learn a little from them.
Milt Shook
|
