This year, in addition to $1,000 a month in child support, I was forced by Manhattan Family Court to pay more than $3,500 in dental expenses for my daughter Chloé, expenses that my insurance would have covered had sicko ex-wife ask the dentist to fill and send the insurance forms to the insurance company. I paid also for a $680 lice treatment for my daughters although at this price, I suspect that sicko ex-wife has treated the entire Upper West Side of Manhattan. Finally, Support Magistrate Grey added to my bill $875 for my ex-wife lawyer fees.
I thought that Manhattan Family Court was ahead of the fray for biased and unfair rulings against non-custodial fathers. Presumptuous judgment. There is always worst with family court justice.
Non-custodial fathers typically pay child support for children they rarely see or like myself, for children
they don’t see at all. They usually pay child support for children who are theirs tough. Not in Oklahoma. In 2001, Brande Samuel works in Texas. He is ordered to go to family court to set up child support for a child he is supposed to have had with Nadia Smith. He cannot go. Although Nadia Smith has never accepted he signs the birth certificate, the court did not blink and bombarded him father of the child. In 2004, after two years in jail, he starts working as a welder for less than the minimum wage. He starts paying child support. Unfortunately Jarrel Wade, the Tulsa World’s journalist, does not tell us what do child support payments represent as a share of a below the minimum-wage income in Oklahoma. Surprise surprise, Brande Samuel quickly falls behind. He now owes $13,000 in child support arrears. Yet he smells a rat and decides to seek a DNA test for the child, which he finally gets in 2007. 0% chance he is the father.
It comes without saying that all these steps taken by Brande Samuel to fix Oklahoma family court’s mistakes are on him and have not helped his financial situation; Brande Samuel is no Joe the plumber (who earns close to $250,000 a year). Will there ever be funds appropriated to compensate fathers for the hardship that family courts have inflicted on them?
Some sensitive people wonder why Madonna is getting a divorce in England, whose justice is supposed to favor the interest of fathers (Father for Justice would certainly not agree). Frankly, I share the view of these folks. Madonna’s pick does not make any sense. Why not use good old Oklahoma biased family courts instead?