In March North Dakotans With Past-Due Child Support Will Be Listed On The Internet Like Sex Offenders

Rob Port • January 18, 2012

We’re all familiar with sex offender registries. People convicted of certain crimes must provide personal information about where they live, etc. to law enforcement agencies so that they can be listed in an online database. Ostensibly this is so that people living in certain areas can be aware of any dangerous predators in their midst, but there’s also an element of shame to it.

I’ve always wondered why people who are so dangerous they must register in a government database aren’t still in prison, but that’s a debate for another post.

Now the State of North Dakota is applying that same thinking to parents with overdue child support. As of January 2012 the state’s child support enforcement agency is authorized to create an online database which “shall include a listing of any obligor who owes past-due support that is being enforced by the child support enforcement agency, the obligor’s date of birth, and the amount of past-due support that is being enforced by the child support enforcement agency.” This database will be going live on March 1st of 2012.

This is problematic for a number of reasons.

North Dakota’s child support enforcement bureaucracy is really, really awful at its job. I’ve paid child support for years. The mailings I get from the agency are almost unintelligible, and at times have told me that I’m “in arrears” on payments. Yet, when I’ve called the only sometimes helpful staff at child support enforcement, I’m told I’m only “technically” in arrears due to some delay in payments being posted in their system, or some mix up over the bi-annual recalculation of my payments.

I’ve always made consistent child support payments, yet this “technically in arrears” situation has happened to me several times throughout my dealings with the child support agency. I suspect that anyone on the hook for child support who has ever gone through the process of something like switching jobs has had the same experience. Now, with a new database going online, my “technically in arrears” could get my name listed on the internet shaming list despite my years of good-faith and on-time payments.

How in the world is that fair? Not only is it a real headache for someone like me who is in the public eye a fair bit (and with no small number of political enemies who would love to embarrass me), but even for citizens who just under going a routine background check.

Employers aren’t allowed to inquire about whether or not a prospective employee has children, but they will be able to access this database and see if that employee employee is listed in the child support database of shame (whether that listing is fair or not).

I see child support as an obligation. If you have children you should not be able to escape the financial responsibilities that come with them. But there is a point at which enforcement of those responsibilities goes too far. It’s bad enough that those with overdue child support can be put in jail, or have their driver’s license taken away from them, for non-payment (how is someone in jail, or who can’t get to work, going to earn the money to pay their child support?).

It’s even worse to give even those payers with trivial amounts of overdue (or “technically” overdue, as the case may be) amounts of child support the same sort of public shaming we give sex predators.

The legislature needs to re-think this policy. If we’re going to have such a database, at the very least make it only for egregious or chronic offenders who go months without paying, not parents who are making good faith efforts to pay.

Dakotacyr

“on the hook” for child support? Really, Rob? You get someone pregnant, and now you are “on the hook” for child support. I hope your child doesn’t read that line. Nice.

http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

Uh, yeah. On the hook. As in obligated. Parents who have children are obligated to support them. That’s what I believe.

I’m not sure what your problem is.

http://Sayanythingblog.com The Whistler

Stupidity mostly.

Robertfrost

Dakotacyr, you know I am not in the business of defending Rob. But here, I have to point out something in your post. While I am very much pro life, this is, currently, a pro-abortion country. So, “getting someone pregnant” is not a good enough reason to obligate a man to pay child support. It would be if this country was pro-life, but it isn’t. When a woman finds out she is pregnant, she “gets to choose” if she wants the child or not, and the man involved has no say in the matter. So, if she chooses to have the child, that’s her choice, not the man’s. The man should not be obligated to support the child financially if it’s the woman’s choice to have the child.

Now, in the interest of full disclosure: I am a pro-life person. In my idea of a “perfect reproductive world”, a woman gets pregnant, she either gives the baby up for adoption or keeps it, and the man has a say in the process, and if the baby is kept, the man supports the child. But right now, thats not the USA. So, I struggle with the idea that a woman has all the decision making power and the man can only sit back and write checks. If its a pro-choice country, it’s pro-choice for both men and women. Just because a woman chooses to keep a baby doesn’t mean the man did. Her choice then includes supporting the child on her own.

In the context of marriage, a child born is a mutual decision automatically. If a divorce occurs, that man supports the child. He does not get the chance to go back in time and choose not to have the child for purposes of child support. But your line said “get someone pregnant”. In a pro-choice country, if pregnancy was not the intention of the act, and the choice is all the woman’s, the responsibility is all hers as well, unless the man chooses to be a father to the child and be involved in that child’s life. Sorry, I know that doesn’t sound fair, but thats what we get in our “pro-choice” society.

Rob, just so you know, I’m not in any way implying that any of this is applicable to your situation. I don’t know the circumstances behind your child, nor do I wish to. I just want you to know that I don’t think of you as a guy that runs around “getting someone pregnant”. I only brought this up to illustrate that, in a society where many liberals are pro-choice, they fail to truly be pro-choice. They are pro-choice for females, not males, and that concept does relate to the topic of child support and the comment from Dakotacyr.

http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

I appreciate your comments, and I agree. I’m pro-life too, so I don’t see abortion as a valid choice. Thus, I don’t really see that fathers or mothers (but mostly fathers, as it happens) can set aside their obligation to support their children.

That being said, there is some hypocrisy in the status quo, as you point out.

Jamermorrow

nobody has the right to live off of another human by force.

http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

I’m ok with parents being obliged to take care of their own children. Unless you’re arguing for letting kids starve in the gutter, we either hold the parents who make the babies responsible for caring for the babies or the taxpayers foot the bill.

I’d rather tie the responsibility to the individual.
Jamermorrow

Charity and people that want to help others will keep children from starving. Plenty of people want to adopt children. Why make parents that don’t want children support their children?
http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

If they didn’t want children, then they shouldn’t have had children.

Why let parents who have children avoid their responsibilities, Jamer? That’s what we limited government types are supposed to be for. Individual responsibility.
Jamermorrow

Nobody has the responsibility for some other person unless they voluntarily choose to be responsible. Charity needs to be voluntarily done.
Jamermorrow

Nobody has the right to initiate force. All activities need to be voluntarily done. This idea is individual responsibility. Nobody is forced to help somebody else. This will ensure individual responsibility because you would have no safety nets or government to turn to.

Jamermorrow

I agree, Fathers should be able to abort the children either through a real abortion or through non support of the child. I have no children nor do I want any. If somebody is pro choice they should also respect the choice of the father. Nobody has the right to live off of another human being without their consent.

Theapothecaryguy

You’re at liberty to masturbate or get a vasectomy. If you are prepared to risk pregnancy to get your jollies, it’s not up to a woman to have an abortion to relieve you of the financial burden of your voluntary actions.

Oh wait – in the libertarian worldview, it’s the kid’s fault that you diddled his mommy.

Robertfrost

I think the woman had a voice in getting some jollies on the deal. It’s not a one-person party when a child is conceived. Check your male ego and your “every woman is a victim” attitude at the door. And how dare you insinuate that a woman can’t make her own choices? Your liberal feminist friends would tell you that a woman has the right to choose. She did when she “got her jollies” from some guy and got pregnant as a result.
Jamermorrow

Exactly, its not like women are hating every second of it. Let be honest, women control who they have sex with. Guys are always willing. We just need permission.
Dakotacyr

Loser!
Jamermorrow

I do masturbate like every guy with a penis does. Nobody has the right to live off of another human being by force. That means all welfare programs are immoral. If you love children so much I am sure you would be more than happy to support mine.

Dakotacyr

Delinquent taxpayers are put on lists in the states. No one is comparing them to sex offender lists.

Overwrought once again.

http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

I think the comparison to sex offender lists is apt. Both are attempts to use shame as punishment.

Dakotacyr

I do agree with you though that there should be a 60-90 delinquency period before a name goes on the list.

http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

That’s probably my biggest beef. Given that most payers have their child support withheld from their paychecks, it’s easy to have a delay or something when you’re switching jobs. It has happened to me.

I’d have less of a problem with the database if they limited to people who were actually problem payers.

Dakotacyr

agreed.

howiseeit

Not a bad idea except that we have to rely on the capability of a governmental entity to keep the details straight. Therefore ……Bad Idea.

http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

I’m not sure I’m comfortable with the idea in general, but if we’re going to do it we should at least limit it to people who have large amounts of unpaid obligations.

Awfulorv

I am, at the moment, putting the finishing touches on my Before Sex pill for men, which should solve the problem.

opinionated

I love this.. can it sprinkled on our teens food so they can avoid all this headache

Anonymous

I think it’s potassium nitrate, but I’m not sure of the dose.

Dlao

it is run by the government, what makes you think it can be run efficiently or in a proper buisness like manner?
Calthrope

The public notification of those in arrears of their child support payments, started in Santa Barbara, California about twenty years ago. It was the brainchild of District Attorney Sneedon. Who got famous prosecuting Michael Jackson for child molestation. He had ” wanted posters” created with photos of “offenders”….
Game

First off, I have major concerns with making this list public, if for no other reason than it can be embarrassing for the children involved. I also share Rob’s lack of trust over the system to get the info right.
However, on another note, I have never understood why this is not a bigger issue for social conservatives. I mean, I know that the biggest threat to the family is gay marriage (sarcasm), however, the fiscal strain that deadbeat parents place on custodial parents is not only a threat to the family, but also to the government, as these families are often times forced to get assistance from the government to fill the gap. It is also normally a pretty good ideal for the development of the child to have both parents involved, and let’s face it, men don’t always do as good of a job as they should in this area. (but wait, what about the gays!!!)
I once heard a conservative radio host who said that women should be punished for having kids out of wedlock.(as if only the women was responsible for creating the child) I wonder if that is part of the issue? As a family values person myself, I find it reprehensible that people view children as punishment, and not a gift from God. But again, what is really important is that we pass another law about the gays!

http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

I agree with this. Child support is about tying responsibility to the individual.

Those that made the babies should bear the cost of caring for them. Otherwise, the taxpayers pay.

Kcfreakazoid

But according to fellow conservative Rick Santorum using birth control is a sin and should be outlawed as well as abortion. At least gay sex is non-procreative (as is the sort of sex Ricky had with Catholic priests growing up).

http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

I’m not a Santorum fan, or even much of a social conservative (outside of being pro-life).

Leh1369

I was married to a woman from NC. We divorced and I started the court ordered child payments. She remarried, split and the child services in NC tried to up my child payments by over $200 a month without a court order. Seems she went on welfare. I requested to return to NC and take my boy into my custody. I never heard from them again. I would have taken custody because I was the father, even tho she had refused me the right to see him in violation of the court order. Funny how it works out because now he and I get along great and I have 2 grandboys I get to see at least, twice a year.

Jimmypop

“technically in arrears”
doesnt the person owed the support have to report you as past due? otherwise, how would the state even know whether youre paying at all?

anyway, i see this as no different that reporting the crimes (dui, drugs, theft or whatever) in the paper as they do now. and back to my point/ question…how does the state even know if youre paying or not unless someone tells them?

Game

Child support is administered through the court system, and the ND Child support system. Amounts are taken from a check and then given to the other parent.
http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

doesnt the person owed the support have to report you as past due? otherwise, how would the state even know whether youre paying at all?

Because all child support payments go through the state. That’s a federal guideline the state must follow in order to qualify for certain human services funds.

In fact, the reason why it’s almost impossible to reform anything having to do with child support is because a lot of federal funding is based on how much the state collects and distributes in child support.

I think the state gets something akin to 2/3′s of what it collects/distributes in child support in the form of funding for TANF (welfare).

Jimmypop

“Because all child support payments go through the state.” God, i was hoping you were not going to say that… how sad we have to spend our tax dollars because people made bad choices. even worse, we then embolden our leadership by turning this sadness into ‘free’ matching money. sickening. Same old theme I guess….people screw up and everyone responsible has to pay for it. even if those that screwed up dont want anyone else to pay for their bad choices.

Jamermorrow

Nobody has the right to live off of another human being by force. Fathers should not have to support children except if they so choose.

http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

I disagree. The fathers have a choice when the make the decision as to whether or not to sleep with the mom.

IF they put a baby in a woman, they’re obliged to care for that baby.

Better the people who made the baby be responsible than the taxpayers.

Jamermorrow

If nobody has the right to live off of another human than we would not have taxation either. Thus the child would not live off of taxpayers.

http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

There you and I will have to agree to disagree.

I think there is an appropriate level of government, and I think some level of taxation is prudent to fund that government.
Matthew

I glad you use “if” in your asinine statement.

Children do have the right to live off other humans, their parents. If not than abandoning a child or child neglect would not be a crime. Child support is just ensures that the burden is shared by both parents.

You are stll a moron.

Jamermorrow

That right can go away pretty damn quick not making it a right.

Anonymous

I believe the mother should pick better partners. The mothers have incentive to get pregnant with child support and all the gov’t goodies.

Jamermorrow

If a women was smart about who they slept with and had children with. They could live off of child support without every having to work. The system is bullshit. Guys should be able to opt out.

Matthew

They opt out by not having sex,.

You are a moron.
Jamermorrow

Sounds like a dull life. I am sure you don’t have the option so it is easy for you to not have sex.
http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

Sorry, Jamer, but with choices come responsibilities.
Dakotacyr

then get a vasectomy and have all the sex you want.
Jamermorrow

Or have sex with liberal women
http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

Hey hey you libertarians should stick to your own kind.
Leave my liberal women alone.
Jamermorrow

Have you not heard: Libertarians are just liberals who understand economics. I am not into waiting to get married so liberal women it is. If I only slept with libertarian women I would have very slim pickings.
Doug

“Leave my liberal women alone.”

But they’re soooo easy when you offer them something free.

http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

There is some truth in that.

My wife worked at a daycare once upon a time. It was a minimum wage job, but she liked working with the kids. She didn’t get health insurance and was talking with some of her co-workers about how they handled it.

They told her to get pregnant and the state would provide insurance and food and other goodies. No joke. Lady said it without a bit of shame.

Ash

Little kids don’t know how their play pals will turn out. Such was the case
with me. The girl I played barbies with grew up and had five children by the
time she was 24 for the sole purpose of reaping in bennies. Her older sister had
eight for the same reason. Using children to make a living is disgusting.

Now, my mom’s side of the family is big and dominated by women. I am
ashamed to admit this but they are well bred gold-diggers. You see it in the
mothers and daughters, and now it’s carrying on to granddaughters. Most of them
don’t work and live off spousal and child support. I’ve heard my fair share of disturbing “girl talks” revolving around
ways to seduce men. At the family reunion last fall my aunts and cousins bragged
about who got the most in child support.

I could tell stories about my kin and other old friends who have jumped on the
support gravy train. I’m not sure when I began questioning the morals in that
but I remember asking myself where is the love? I have my dad’s love. I wish
many of my cousins knew what that’s like. If their mothers were looking for
marriage material, maybe they would.

Men, just be careful. Don’t think being manipulated into becoming a weekend
dad won’t happen to you.
Jamermorrow

Yea i see Women like this in the bars all the time. I always wonder who is watching the kids. I suppose they get enough in child support to hire outside help. Being a bar fly requires not having a job but having some sort of income. Best way to do that is through child support.

Anonymous

Interesting though how, after a consensual conception, a woman does indeed have a legal “opt-out” of motherhood while a man does not.

In otherwords, when a man has consensualsex, he’s having sex with the notion he may become a father. While a woman, well, she is enjoying completely sexual liberation. – which was the underlying goal fought over for a decade by the femenist movement and eventually won imo. There is no “self-check” nor responsibility left in her world. Nature has been civily overcome for her gender.

So where’s our “opt-out” while simultaneously enjoying full sexual liberty?
Throw-in

Dakotacyr

Why should I support the children a man refuses to support. keep it in your pants, then, if you don’t want to have kids, it’s that simple.

Jamermorrow

You should not have to. Nobody should be forced to support anybody that is my point. Taxation, welfare, and forced charity are all immoral.

Matthew

So only the mother is responsible? I bet you are against abortion also.

Jamermorrow

Hardly, I think mothers should be able to give up their children at any time or sell them if they want. How is that for being pro choice.

madmartigan

I’ve had the same problem with the Virgina Child Support Enforcement Agency. I would pay the designated amount via direct deposit and often get my monthly statement stating that I was “in arrears.” It would be $1.00 or even 50 cents and it would show up on my credit report as being late. I would get a similar response as you; “technically in arrears.” You’re right! The focus should be on those who chronically and intentionally avoid payments. A great deal of the child enforcement agency is flawed and should be reformed.

Jimmypop

have faith, this reform will come after the steroids in baseball hearings and things that REALLY matter to joe six pack.

Anonymous

What will happen if they put somebody on the list that shouldn’t be? That would be a leak of private information and libel. Law suits would be enough to end these ‘lists’.

Child support should only be a civil and not a criminal matter.
Awfulorv

Divorce, the distribution of assets, alimony, should be handled by someone other than that Judge who stands to receive 50 % of the vote, next election, for being known as sympathetic to women. If your bride, poor little thing, forges a $10.000 check from your account, and your lawyer advises you that the Judge will not even attempt to account for that amount in his proceedings, you know you’re in for a shit kicking of the first order.
Anonymous

Perhaps if we’re on the kick of government invasion of privacy we should have a public internet list of those who choose to have abortions for non-medical reasons? …or rid ourselves of “no-fault” divorce and post a list as to why & who’s fault the divorce was?
Rick Olson

As you know here in North Dakota, we have a strong “sunshine” law. Essentially, this means that most government records are open to the press and the public, unless certain information is specifically exempted by the Legislature from being open, or it has been sealed from inspection by a judge in a court case, for example.

This means child support records, I assume, are already matters of public record. Unless I’m mistaken about that, which I freely admit that I could be. So, posting these records of delinquent parents on the internet may certainly be extreme, it would also seem to me that if these records are not specifically exempt from public inspection, then there is no reason not to post them on the internet.

If having this information readily available will help make a deadbeat parent cough up and pay what is due, then all the better, right?
Camsaure

I agree child support is a mess. It seems to me their goal is to force the women onto welfare, all the while extorting money from the men. Their record is atrocious. There should also be some reasonable leniency for workers laid off until they find a job. But now ND child enforcement even allows ACS workers whom have refused to work due to the strike, to be excused from paying their support. This even applies if they have since quit jobs that they have had after they had gone on strike. This is another example of how convuluted the child support mess has become. I have also witnessed fathers arrested on the job site for being in arrears when it was CSES paperwork fault, this usually happened on Fridays so they would have to wait until Monday to get things resolved. It always appeared to me the Child Support Enforcement Services was more interested in harrassing the good fathers rather then the deadbeats, some of whom have never made any effort to try to pay at all.

http://Sayanythingblog.com The Whistler

I think you’re right on. There’s no joy in harassing the true deadbeats because you’ll never be able to collect anything from them.

But if you go after those that are trying to make the payments you can make yourself out to be an actual productive person.

Personally I think they get jobs there because they hate people and want a chance to push people around.

Anonymous

Child Support agency is a totally different bird….the reason there is so much focus on getting child support payments, is not so the children have funds, it is so the state does. This is one of the only “money making” programs the State has, since they are NOT obligated to pay out all that the parent pays in. They get to keep a good portion of it!

SayAnythingBlog.com

In March North Dakotans With Past-Due Child Support Will Be Listed On The Internet Like Sex Offenders

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments