Best Interests of the family courts budget? I would now like to continue with section (c), or the third "best interests of the child" criteria as defined in Michigan law. This reads: "the capacity and disposition of the parties involved to provide the child with food, clothing, medical care or other remedial care recognized and permitted under the laws of this state in place of medical care, and other material needs".
This basically comes down to whether a parent can provide the material things for his or her own child.....and this is the factor that is routinely handed to the custodial parent-AFTER they start receiving child support payments. It does NOT matter to your judge if the parent is employed, employable, or even is capable of actually taking care of the child(ren).
Another point arises here-exactly WHOM should be able to claim the child(ren) as dependent(s)-and whose dependents are they-it doesn't matter to the courts or to the government who actually PAYS for the actual support-it only matters to them WHO the child stays with OVERNIGHT-hence the reason that the courts keep the amount of time the child(ren) spend with the NCP to the barest minimum they can.
This is also where Social Security's Title IV-D comes in. You can run any good internet search engine and find a wealth of information on Title IV-D, but I will give you a brief and working summary of it.
Title IV-D was originally started as a Federal program to collect support funds from parents who had WILLFULLY and DELIBERATELY abandoned his or her children, and to help establish paternity of these abandoned children when necessary. Very noble-any parent who abandons his or her children should be tracked down, their wages garnished, and otherwise be treated as the fiend they are. This was implemented to recover the costs of placing the children/family on the old TANF program-TEMPORARY assistance.
Title IV-D has now been perverted, through the federal financial incentives, to include virtually ALL parents who divorce. A change in 1996, during the Clinton Administration, changed key wording from the "absent" parent to the "non-custodial" parent. This opened the door for the states, and their county court judges to make a parent the non-custodial, and rake in the federal grants and incentive bonuses from the feds.
Because of this greed, MILLIONS of parents, never on welfare rolls, have been forced from the lives of their child(ren) so their county and state can make a profit from that divorce and child custody fight.
Michigan alone collects MILLIONS of dollars yearly for this. The average yearly total for the states collectively-4.2 BILLION dollars, plus incentives worth another $428 MILLION in 2006 alone.
All of that, to reward the judges and other bureaucrats for removing a loving, capable, and fit parent from the lives of his or her children.
Of course, the NCP chosen is normally the one who can actually PAY the support-whomever has the larger paycheck is normally chosen. Yes, the number of mother NCP's is increasing, as the average salary of American women increases. The larger the support amounts, the more the states get in the financial incentives. The more divorcing parents they can indoctrinate into the system, the more they collect, and on, and on, and on.....
So, it matters not to the judges who can actually support the children after a divorce-their chosen and anointed one will be handed what (s)he needs, so factor (c) can be awarded to her (usually), just as in my personal case.
A Father Of Two.
Think Michigan Child Custody Determinations Are Fair? Think again!