US executive who fled to Thailand to avoid paying child support goes to prison

[parmo2]

Thailand is not part of the legal "Hague convention" of western countries.

Child support laws were introduced after unilateral divorce laws caused a massive increase in social budget due to single mother families in the 70s. The state became the new hubby to all these women and a matriarchal underclass was born. laws for the last 40 years have been made on the side of women and the state continues to not make women responsible for their actions while giving them multiple "rights".

But someone has to pay the bill and typically the governments in western countries have removed all defences for men against women. USA is an extreme example and they jail fathers as examples despite most fathers being really unable to pay. There are myriad incentives for local courts and local government to collect "child support" which mainly goes to government for recouping social scurity payments for the feckless females who frequently have mtiple kids with multiple fathers

[keestha]

There are a lot of foreigners living in Thailand who if they would go home, would have a big problem because of not paying alimony. I don't have sympathy for those who do not financially support their kids, but in many of these cases there are no children involved.

[Ulysses G.]

Paying child support is normal its not paying for your partner its paying for your child.

While I agree with you, the woman usually lives on the support as well. A jilted husband is going to resent having to support her after she left him.

[parmo2]

"Child support" is a typical big brother government euphemism , the money is recouped by governments to pay for social scurity, hence the draconian methods used.

It is money that spiteful women are allowed to make their former partners pay for the stealing of a mans own kids when the woman feels that the love is gone

Edited July 1, 2014 by parmo2

[wabothai]

We don't know the whole story. That he has been ordered by the court does not mean a whole lot to me, unless i know the underlying story.

[robblok]

Paying child support is normal its not paying for your partner its paying for your child.

While I agree with you, the woman usually lives on the support as well. A jilted husband is going to resent having to support her after she left him.

I agree there too, and I have paid in the past (partner payments not child as i had no children) knowing she was taking advantage of me (too bad for me but man up to it don't act like a child).

Guys might not like it but even if a wife lives off it (wrong of course but it will happen) some of it goes to the child too. But fact is its your child you made it you are responsible for it. The fact that you don't like what the judge says does not make it wrong.

[Jeffrey346]

So what's the deal here. Was this guy deported, or did he go back to the US and was arrested?

[Jimbolai]

I admire the problem but I do not have a solution.

On the other hand, nail the bum. Take all his assets and keep him in prison till the kid(s) are of age. Then they can send him some cookies, after all he is still the father.

[jds2003]

Prison sentence with no parole!! That will help!!

I went through this in Aus and paid my way but had little money left for myself to start a new relationship. This was 1999 and the way they calculated child support was a joke!

If he chose to go to Thailand then he should be free to do so. He should however have paid something to his children! Maybe not as excessive as $1500 pw. I do understand why he did this though!

Edited July 1, 2014 by jds2003

[NeverSure]

U.S. child support is one of those debts that one can never escape. Child support and student loans are debts that cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. The amount of child support is made on formula that uses (1) percentage of custody (2) gross monthly income. So if you make alot of money, your payments will be more than someone who is broke, and yes the monthly child support can be more than what is actually needed.

What bothers me about the system is that it is the state who is getting a cut of it. Local district attorneys have programs to recover child support. The district attorney's office for the county then gets a cut of whatever is recovered. And compound interest is added to what isn't paid. So while you argue that there's some deadbeat dad out there, keep in mind that what is really going on is that the government is making sure it gets its money.

The father is usually given the opportunity to pay the support to the wife. It's when he doesn't pay, or pays really late that the mother can get the court to collect. Then he has to pay directly to the court. If he gets bad about that the court will issue a writ of garnishment and have it taken out of his pay and sent to the court.

If the court has to handle it there are reasonable fees, but not excessive. Certainly not compared to not getting paid.

He is also risking getting hit with contempt of court for violating the court order which is a crime. He can get jail and/or a fine. Oh, and his credit rating is destroyed for years to come. That judgement to force payment of a court order is as bad as it gets.

Some guys like the OP perp just have to do everything the hard way.

[Phoenix1312]

I know a certain Kiwi who fled to Phuket to avoid child support. He is running a restaurant and can afford to pay. Just doesn't want to.

[BudRight]

Paying child support is normal its not paying for your partner its paying for your child.

While I agree with you, the woman usually lives on the support as well. A jilted husband is going to resent having to support her after she left him.

I agree there too, and I have paid in the past (partner payments not child as i had no children) knowing she was taking advantage of me (too bad for me but man up to it don't act like a child).

Guys might not like it but even if a wife lives off it (wrong of course but it will happen) some of it goes to the child too. But fact is its your child you made it you are responsible for it. The fact that you don't like what the judge says does not make it wrong.

It can be wrong for other reasons.

[Phoenix1312]

The government decided that this man cannot be a parent although he was probably a very good father.

The cult of the mother and feminist idealogy have made the laws very anti male . You may not believe this , it must happen to you before you can understand the gross injustice.

He had his his house, car and kids stolen maybe by an unfaithful wife and the government want him to pay for the stealing.

Women are allowed to make false claims of domestic violence and even sexual claims against his children , all because of this cult of the mother and feminism.

It is a red/blue pill thing , if you study how feminist man hating has changed the laws , you too may take the red pill

I know what you are saying. My friends ex wife also took everything and kidnapped his children but he still has to pay child support. They live 5000 kms away and he never gets to see them. It is a total joke. I feel very sorry for the genuine fathers out there.

My friend was and is devastated.

[belg]

$1500 per month, a bit steep, no ?

[NeverSure]

$1500 per month, a bit steep, no ?

Depends on his income. To some people that wouldn't fuel their Lear Jet. I have no idea how much he made.

Some guys flee to spite the wife, not caring about the consequences to their children.

I have no idea how a man could abandon his children, no matter how bad his wife is.

[spermwhale]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

How will he keep up with the payments in prison ? Sounds counter productive to me.

No it doesn't. This scumbag didn't pay for 9 years. You think he was ever planning to start? These absent fathers are the worst. My dad left our family when I was young even though he had been ordered to pay my mother child support. Because he didn't we had a tough life... My mom couldn't even afford to keep the heat on the winter.

The courts should be applauded for sending this guy to the slammer.

NOW, if only Thailand had the same type of laws to rein in the countless fathers who have completely disappeared from their kids' lives and never contribute a satang to their well being.

[submaniac]

One day I will write a book detailing my technique for avoiding pitfalls like those found in this thread. The working title of the book is "keep dick in pants". I find that my technique also works well to avoid a myriad of other problems that are posted about on Thaivisa.

[robblok]

Paying child support is normal its not paying for your partner its paying for your child.

While I agree with you, the woman usually lives on the support as well. A jilted husband is going to resent having to support her after she left him.

I agree there too, and I have paid in the past (partner payments not child as i had no children) knowing she was taking advantage of me (too bad for me but man up to it don't act like a child).

Guys might not like it but even if a wife lives off it (wrong of course but it will happen) some of it goes to the child too. But fact is its your child you made it you are responsible for it. The fact that you don't like what the judge says does not make it wrong.

It can be wrong for other reasons.

How can it ever be wrong.. you got a child your responsible.

Not being able to see the child does not free you from paying (sure its bad but your obligation is still there)

Give a good reason for not paying.. money not spend right or not on the kid... still not your business your responsible for the child what happens with the money after that is not for you to say. If it is real bad start a law case over it with proof.

[blazes]

There are a lot of foreigners living in Thailand who if they would go home, would have a big problem because of not paying alimony. I don't have sympathy for those who do not financially support their kids, but in many of these cases there are no children involved.

"Alimony" of course is not "child support". No man, anywhere, any time, should ever have to pay alimony to an ex-missis who has effed off with another man.

If he just wants out, let him pay a token amount for x years, depending on the woman's age and circumstances.

I once came across (in Paris!!) a California woman, who had married TWO surgeons in San Diego and was now living comfortably off the alimony. And Western women often have the fkn cheek to warn us Westerners who come to LoS, seeking to escape the feminazis, to watch out for gold diggers!!!

What a terrible world we live in....

[robblok]

There are a lot of foreigners living in Thailand who if they would go home, would have a big problem because of not paying alimony. I don't have sympathy for those who do not financially support their kids, but in many of these cases there are no children involved.

"Alimony" of course is not "child support". No man, anywhere, any time, should ever have to pay alimony to an ex-missis who has effed off with another man.

If he just wants out, let him pay a token amount for x years, depending on the woman's age and circumstances.

I once came across (in Paris!!) a California woman, who had married TWO surgeons in San Diego and was now living comfortably off the alimony. And Western women often have the fkn cheek to warn us Westerners who come to LoS, seeking to escape the feminazis, to watch out for gold diggers!!!

What a terrible world we live in....

Yes such a bad world now leading Thai woman to your bed in promise of a better life and money. Can you imagine how it would be if they had money enough. They would not give you a second look. Its all based on income and if you play the game you can loose. Obviously those foreign woman are a lot smarter as guys who fall for the trap.

[blazes]

There are a lot of foreigners living in Thailand who if they would go home, would have a big problem because of not paying alimony. I don't have sympathy for those who do not financially support their kids, but in many of these cases there are no children involved.

"Alimony" of course is not "child support". No man, anywhere, any time, should ever have to pay alimony to an ex-missis who has effed off with another man.

If he just wants out, let him pay a token amount for x years, depending on the woman's age and circumstances.

I once came across (in Paris!!) a California woman, who had married TWO surgeons in San Diego and was now living comfortably off the alimony. And Western women often have the fkn cheek to warn us Westerners who come to LoS, seeking to escape the feminazis, to watch out for gold diggers!!!

What a terrible world we live in....

Yes such a bad world now leading Thai woman to your bed in promise of a better life and money. Can you imagine how it would be if they had money enough. They would not give you a second look. Its all based on income and if you play the game you can loose. Obviously those foreign woman are a lot smarter as guys who fall for the trap.

Clearly, your humping and pumping has gone to your head....

[Scott]

Posts have been deleted for various reasons. Please stay on topic.

My knowledge in this area is limited, but I do know a man who was awarded custody of his children after a divorce and his ex-wife was ordered to pay child support.

I also believe that if you do not pay child support and the children are on public assistance, it is the gov't that comes after you to collect what is owed to them for supporting your children.

[capcc76]

Funny, but sad how this topic brings out the dead beat losers with a chip on their shoulder spouting ridiculous crap that child support benefits government, reimburses government or social security.

Child support is not to screw with dads. It applies to women equally that are noncustodial parents. It is about the child and has nothing to do with men, women, government, social security or etc.

I have been a lawyer for over 20 years and I can say unequivocally that the current child support guidelines and how it is calculated is extremely fair and reasonable. The current laws are in place because so many dead beat dads skipped out in their children.

The formula is an objective formula where you plug in incomes of both parents and days spent with both parents. If you want to reduce child support obligation, spend more days with your child. Court will give father and mother equal time provided neither parent is an extreme loser, drug addict or abussive person.

Hopefully, people like the guy that said a women only needs a $150 a month to care for a child does not and will not have any children. $150??? Cheap, pathetic and selfish or absolutely no clue what it takes to be a real man and a real father.

Fault in divorce is not a child support issue. You picked the women, you did her, you had a baby with her and you probably ran her off because you were selfish or a loser and that is not attractive to woman. It's not your child's fault it's yours causes by your decisions and your actions. Pay up suckers.

[blazes]

Funny, but sad how this topic brings out the dead beat losers with a chip on their shoulder spouting ridiculous crap that child support benefits government, reimburses government or social security.

Child support is not to screw with dads. It applies to women equally that are noncustodial parents. It is about the child and has nothing to do with men, women, government, social security or etc.

I have been a lawyer for over 20 years and I can say unequivocally that the current child support guidelines and how it is calculated is extremely fair and reasonable. The current laws are in place because so many dead beat dads skipped out in their children.

The formula is an objective formula where you plug in incomes of both parents and days spent with both parents. If you want to reduce child support obligation, spend more days with your child. Court will give father and mother equal time provided neither parent is an extreme loser, drug addict or abussive person.

Hopefully, people like the guy that said a women only needs a $150 a month to care for a child does not and will not have any children. $150??? Cheap, pathetic and selfish or absolutely no clue what it takes to be a real man and a real father.

Fault in divorce is not a child support issue. You picked the women, you did her, you had a baby with her and you probably ran her off because you were selfish or a loser and that is not attractive to woman. It's not your child's fault it's yours causes by your decisions and your actions. Pay up suckers.

Suckers? Is this normal language for someone who has been practising law for 20 years?

Sounds like a promo for "Call Saul"....

Edited July 1, 2014 by blazes

[NeverSure]

Funny, but sad how this topic brings out the dead beat losers with a chip on their shoulder spouting ridiculous crap that child support benefits government, reimburses government or social security.

Child support is not to screw with dads. It applies to women equally that are noncustodial parents. It is about the child and has nothing to do with men, women, government, social security or etc.

I have been a lawyer for over 20 years and I can say unequivocally that the current child support guidelines and how it is calculated is extremely fair and reasonable. The current laws are in place because so many dead beat dads skipped out in their children.

The formula is an objective formula where you plug in incomes of both parents and days spent with both parents. If you want to reduce child support obligation, spend more days with your child. Court will give father and mother equal time provided neither parent is an extreme loser, drug addict or abussive person.

Hopefully, people like the guy that said a women only needs a $150 a month to care for a child does not and will not have any children. $150??? Cheap, pathetic and selfish or absolutely no clue what it takes to be a real man and a real father.

Fault in divorce is not a child support issue. You picked the women, you did her, you had a baby with her and you probably ran her off because you were selfish or a loser and that is not attractive to woman. It's not your child's fault it's yours causes by your decisions and your actions. Pay up suckers.

Suckers? Is this normal language for someone who has been practising law for 20 years?

Sounds like a promo for "Call Saul"....

Uh, I think the "suckers" would be the idiots who ran off and got themselves thrown in prison.

What is the OP topic, and what suckers do you think the poster was talking about?

[vahack]

Yea I'm wondering how they arrested him too. Child support is not an extradition offense. Did he go back to the US for a visit?

[capcc76]

Posts have been deleted for various reasons. Please stay on topic.

My knowledge in this area is limited, but I do know a man who was awarded custody of his children after a divorce and his ex-wife was ordered to pay child support.

I also believe that if you do not pay child support and the children are on public assistance, it is the gov't that comes after you to collect what is owed to them for supporting your children.

Close, but no ine's explanation or understanding about TANF is accurate. Below us am overview as to how TANF works. One, however, has to an extreme loser not to pay child support to a mother with a child that is so poor that she can qualify for TANF or government assistance.

It is not tax payers or government's responsibility to pay for the noncustodial parent's portion of the financial support obligation related to their children.

http://family-law.lawyers.com/child-support/public-assistance-and-child-support.html

TANF benefits are limited in several ways. Benefits aren't generous, and the program aims to help families with dependent children cover basic needs. TANF coverage is also limited by time, with lifetime benefits covering 60 months for most people. One condition to enroll in the program is that recipients must assign their child support collection rights to the state.

Every state has a child support enforcement agency (CSEA) that assists parents in collecting child support. Each state's agency also has the duty to collect child support for families receiving public aid. These agencies also assist families that don't receive aid. Non-custodial parents pay child support to the agency, which forwards it to the custodial parents.

Once a parent enrolls for aid, the CSEA starts the process to recover child support. This may include obtaining a child support order. CSEA services include:

. . .

[capcc76]

Funny, but sad how this topic brings out the dead beat losers with a chip on their shoulder spouting ridiculous crap that child support benefits government, reimburses government or social security.

Child support is not to screw with dads. It applies to women equally that are noncustodial parents. It is about the child and has nothing to do with men, women, government, social security or etc.

I have been a lawyer for over 20 years and I can say unequivocally that the current child support guidelines and how it is calculated is extremely fair and reasonable. The current laws are in place because so many dead beat dads skipped out in their children.

The formula is an objective formula where you plug in incomes of both parents and days spent with both parents. If you want to reduce child support obligation, spend more days with your child. Court will give father and mother equal time provided neither parent is an extreme loser, drug addict or abussive person.

Hopefully, people like the guy that said a women only needs a $150 a month to care for a child does not and will not have any children. $150??? Cheap, pathetic and selfish or absolutely no clue what it takes to be a real man and a real father.

Fault in divorce is not a child support issue. You picked the women, you did her, you had a baby with her and you probably ran her off because you were selfish or a loser and that is not attractive to woman. It's not your child's fault it's yours causes by your decisions and your actions. Pay up suckers.

Suckers? Is this normal language for someone who has been practising law for 20 years?

Sounds like a promo for "Call Saul"....

Uh, I think the "suckers" would be the idiots who ran off and got themselves thrown in prison.

What is the OP topic, and what suckers do you think the poster was talking about?

Lol, attorney stereotypes! We are not all old, sticks in the mud with no personality. I also cuss like a sailor, just not in court or in front of a jury.

That saying came from the bike builder Jessie James (Sandra Bullocks ex-husband) who tattooed it on his hand to use when collecting debt. Saw that in 2002i sh and stuck with me ever since.

[AfterLOS]

How will he keep up with the payments in prison ? Sounds counter productive to me.

First they'll seize all of his assets wherever they are. Sounds like he had a good job.

Then because if they let him loose he's a flight risk, they make an example out of him to others.

If the mother and child have been destitute because of this, they have been receiving cash, housing and food benefits.

The mother and child are living in Utah. Few go hungry in Utah which is the center for Mormons. Mormons are big on food warehousing and providing free or cheap food even for non members. (Not endorsing Mormons.)

Leave judgement to God, clown.

[elzach]

Thai men are reading this, "child support?? what's that?".