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

[capcc76]

You agree that some old dude being able post pictures of girls he is banging 1/2 his age on Facebook is more important than taking care of his child or children. He quit his job as an IP lawyer and became underemployed voluntarily so he could run away to Thailand and bang younger women. Cool. He can do that all he wants after his child is 18 or provided he can still provide the same support after voluntarily making himself underemployed.

The sad part is running away and not spending time with his child.

Submaniac may not be telling complete story here. His child support would have been calculated based on the child spending X number of days with him. If he took off to Thailand and child not spending X days with him, child support obligations would increase. Perhaps he simply could not afford the increased amount, but he should have never left if he could not afford to pay his debt after leaving.

Actually, after the divorce (he lost custody of his kids, and the wife basically alienated his kids from him), he went through a serious bout of depression. His practice languished, and he was facing discipline for the state bar for not being able to account for client funds. He actually is still on suspension and not able to practice until restitution was paid. He's basically working as a paralegal in a small family law firm in Ventura. (That is my idea of hell). It is a very common practice for one parent to alienate the kids from the other parent.

You seem awfully judgmental, and it is apparently easy for you to pass judgment. But he was going through real hard times, and was really going through some depression issues, and if I were him, I probably would have been depressed too. He lost his house, all his property in the divorce. He had precious little left. He was unable to work in the states due to his bar suspension. Yes, I would have been depressed. I mean what do you want him to do, kill himself? A friend had a place in Bangkok, and he managed to find good paying work at an honorable profession. It was just being able to teach which he loved.

"He should never have left if he could not afford to pay his debt after leaving"? A lot of people will never be able to pay off the debt. If someone goes through a hard time (and yes, I consider depression to be a legitimate thing if you have lost everything in your life), what are you going to do? How are you going to pay off hundreds of thousands of dollars? If the debt is not immediately paid, you now have compound interest on the debt. You really won't be able to pay it off.

No time to get past first paragraph, but I have zero sympathy for any lawyer that misappropriates client funds. Inexcusable and a reflection on the person.

Most humans have been through really difficult times. I went through a divorce I did not want after 17 years of marriage when my children were 12 and 13 because I was married to a career and spent my weekends traveling and racing GT3 Cup. I was initially angry because I provided well for the family, but I was selfish and brought this on myself. My ex and I are great friends now and my life is better than ever. Hotter younger wife and the most amazing 3 year old daughter ever.

As men, sometimes we have to buck up and be a man through the difficult times and just do the right thing. Abandoning children because our feelings got or we did not get our way is not the right thing. Perhaps if your friend would have kept himself together, not misappropriated client funds, not run off to Thailand and not have abandoned his children, his life like mine would have turned out better on the back end.

Karma is a beotch.

Edited July 1, 2014 by capcc76

[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.

A lawyer, after all, is an "officer of the court". Given your background, your defense of "current child support guidelines" is understandable, but certainly not unbiased. I have found it amusing to see how the courts enjoy awarding confiscatory amounts of child support from individuals but when the government itself must pay for support of a child (social security, or welfare) they use a different calculator and are much less liberal.in their awards.

Sadly you appear to be another one of these "self hating" males who strangely think they are benevolent and righteous. You would have us believe you care for women and children but your language betrays you, "you did her", (What kind of idiot uses phrases like "you did her"? How misogynistic can you get! How juvenile! or "you ran her off because you were selfish or a loser" this language betrays your own self guilt and possibly failed relationships. You claim to have practiced law for 20 years. How many times in 20 years did you practice law? Once? Twice? It's not apparent from your post that you have a clue about family law. You can't even spell the word "abusive". If you're really a lawyer I pity the men you may have represented over 20 years in the family law courts.

Too dang funny, you advocate that it is okay for deadbeat fathers to abandon children and with hold child support, but get offended my me say "you did her." I would use more direct language in person, but it would just get deleted. I have also been a full time lawyer and managing partner in a large firm so I would like to think I practiced more than once or twice in 20 years, don't type my briefs on an iPhone. Bizarre people around here, but thanks for being my human spell checker.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts deleted.

[sumtingwong]

Should not the mother also be required to pay $1,500 in child support? She is an adult and they are her children too.

[AnotherOneAmerican]

Most humans have been through really difficult times. I went through a divorce I did not want after 17 years of marriage when my children were 12 and 13 because I was married to a career and spent my weekends traveling and racing GT3 Cup. I was initially angry because I provided well for the family, but I was selfish and brought this on myself. My ex and I are great friends now and my life is better than ever. Hotter younger wife and the most amazing 3 year old daughter ever.

Divorce with teen children doesn't give the woman quite the same strength as divorce with under 10s.

The woman can say what she wants, make any unsupported allergations anyone can think of, and the children get protected from the man.

When they are teens, the court speaks with the children and listens to them a lot more.

Anyway this guy loses his job (fairly or not) but he is still expected to pay the same as if he was still employed and employable.

How is that fair in any way, shape or form.

Don't get me wrong, I made a lot of money from representing these women, and victimizing these men.

But that doesn't make the system or the situation fair or just.

[rohlm50212]

Raised 3 girls in the USA alone the mom could not keep her pants on...1500 for one child is Obsured and at 18 they are abults and when faced with reality they do better than corn fed from another adult

....rediculas to jail a 61 yr old Dad that has worked his ass off

[sumtingwong]

He should have picked a country without an extradition treaty with the USA.

[kevozman1]

I have a little bit of sympathy for men raising families in western countries. Stay pussy whipped or else! lol

Edited July 1, 2014 by kevozman1

[rohlm50212]

Paid 1500.00 for three kids, watched their mom waste it on B/F,s If thr courts are big enought to take support, then be big enough to assure it is used for the children.....My kids moved in with me by choice....Paid her for a year just to keep away from us.

.

[evadgib]

I'd be suitably impressed if anyone on this thread could confirm that the law in any of their countries was blind to the issue of gender and was equally harsh when assessing non-resident mothers (ie Dad has custody/Is the "Parent with care").

Brits should note that the CSA will be steadily wound down for the next 3 years and replaced by this:

Fairness for families, children and taxpayers as new child maintenance system is launched

The "serves him right" brigade would no doubt think twice if they had ever been keel-hauled by the biased & secretive family court system from which there is no redress, and prison / Childrens act legislation is (mis)used for any that dare go public. It's even worse if he has the misfortune of being in Govt employment at the time as they'll simply plunder his earnings without so much as a backward glance.

In years to come I expect a future adult to sue their Govt for denying access to their father as outlined above & thus breaching their right to family life, Sadly I fear it may be 2 or 3 decades before this becomes a reality.

Just my 2p:)

Edited July 1, 2014 by evadgib

[rohlm50212]

And for you Idiot Dad hateing adults,, Ur probably still blaming him for your lacking tenacity to make a life for yourself......

[sumtingwong]

A larger percentage of women refuse to pay their child support than men. And the courts to not force them to either.

Deadbeat Moms wedsite

http://deadbeatmomstories.com/

Deadbeat Moms -- There should be equal consequences for women. - worldlawdirect

http://www.worldlawdirect.com/forum/child-custody-support/51615-deadbeat-moms-there-should-equal-consequences-women.html

Moms Can Be Deadbeats Too

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2002/08/09/moms-can-be-deadbeats-too/

Equal enforcement of Child Support for Deadbeat Moms!!!

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Equal-enforcement-of-Child-Support-for-Deadbeat-Moms/130911376946981

Deadbeat Moms? Should Mothers Be Required To Pay Child Support To Their Child’s Father?

http://madamenoire.com/419975/deadbeat-moms/

[rohlm50212]

For the Dad hateing monkey brains, Ur probably still using your dad as an excuse for your lacking tenacity to make a life for yourself...

[capcc76]

Should not the mother also be required to pay $1,500 in child support? She is an adult and they are her children too.

Hello? No wonder we get so much animosity and controversy over US issues when people lack even a basic grasp of the subject matter.

Below is how child support operates in a generic, but apparently esoteric, sense . . . The parent is assumed to be paying child support obligations during the time in which child is with that parent. The mother would typically pay child support if the child spent more time with the father under the parenting plan entered into the Court.

I do not practice domestic, but my firm's litigation, domestic, criminal and tax department is primarily (60%) entertainment clients. We are top 3 nationwide (accordingly to music industry trade mags) for litigating musician copyright and royalty issues. We represent just about every top act and top musician from 70s to present. I typically have to do some hand holding when my clients are going through a divorce/child support issue even though that is being handled by one of my firm's divorce attorneys and not me. These crazy child support examples you hear about on TV are the exception, not the norm. Typically, child support payments high wealth parents represent a very and surprising small percentage of income. The formula actually exponentially decreases payment obligations as income gets higher even when a large disparity in income exist.

Child Support Calculations

High income individuals spend more and devote more resources to care for their children. Below is an example of typical middle-class/upper middle class divorce issues:

Education

If a child is attending a private school pre-divorce, the Court will strive to keep that child in the same school post divorce because that is the environment in which the child has grown accustom. Accordingly, private school tuition which is typically $ 18,000 to $ 30,000 in my primary city of residence will be factored as a child care expense. Candidly, I would never send my children to a public school and this philosophy has paid off with extremely well balanced, educated teenagers attending tier 1 schools with large scholarship packages. Non-custodial parents refusing to keep their children in private schools in an effort to selfishly reduce child support obligations sicken me. Parents should strive to keep the child's life as stable and familiar as possible post divorce.

For sake of simplicity, let's use $ 2,000 per month ($ 1,800 per month tuition and $ 200 per month for meal ticket, books, computer fees and activity fees).

Shelter

Higher income earners typically purchase//rent residences with sufficient rooms for children to have their own rooms. There are rent/price/payment differences between a 1 bedroom residence and a residence with multiple bedrooms. The added cost of housing associated with having a child or children is factored.

Extra bedroom based on rent value $ 500 per month. (This is low end).

Child care

Custodial parents typically have to work and child care is very expensive.

Low end is $ 800 per month (High end and/or infant care is about $ 350 per week).

Food

Teenage males eat and eat a lot. Luckily, I have girls . . . We don't eat McDonalds and we eat very clean and healthy foods at night. I mainly grill steaks, chicken, fish and etc. and we eat out a fair amount. We also spend at least $ 10 a day for milk, juices, fruit and snacks for our kids, but I will use a low end no snacks and no eating out ever figure.

Very low end and never eating out is $ 450 per month ($ 15 a day 30 days of Dinner and breakfast, plus weekend lunches).

Insurance

Adding a child to single parent's insurance policy for a cheap basic Obama Care policy in my State of primary residence:

$ 200 per month ($ 300 for single and $ 500 for individual with one child).

Medical and prescription deductibles, dental and unreimbursed medical expenses

Dental is the killer here and all children need dental work and/or braces seem to be the norm. Children are also at doctor a lot once they hit school.

$ 50 per month. (Will be much more if child is hospitalized, needs braces, has a chronic health condition and etc.).

Clothes

I have girls and they grow fast.

$ 100 per month per child.

Toys, movies and activities

$ 100 per month per child.

There are many more expenses, but I will stop here. As children get older, their needs and expenses seem to increase.

The above results in $ 4,200 per month in expenses for one child.

Unless the non-custodial parent seeks more, the base and typical care plan will have the child with the custodial parent 285 days a year and the noncustodial parent 80 days a year.

At 285 days per year and $ 138 per day ($ 4,200 X 12/365), the custodial parent is has $ 3,277.50 per month in child care expenses ($ 138 X 285 for time child is with / 12).

While having the child 80 days a year, the non custodial parent is assumed to have $ 920.00 in monthly child care expenses for time spent with non-custodial parent.

The child care formula attempts to balance the two numbers and uses a mathematic formula based on income of each parent. If income is lower, the child support obligation of the non-custodial parent will be capped even if lower than the actual pro rata portion need to meet child's necessary expenses. If the income is high for the non-custodial parent, the formula actually starts giving the non-custodial parent a break as the percentage of income allocated to child support based on expenses becomes lower and lower as income rises. Under the new formulas, high earners actually pay a very low percentage of their income to child support. Alimony, however, is a completely different matter and I am anti-alimony.

[rohlm50212]

To the well versed legal programmed humans, Being a Father or Parent is a privilage, should one skip out their loss.Not something to capitalize on which is what the MODERN capitalisitc world does....Obviously the BS laws you earn your living enforcing do not work, or you and your children would STARVE... put them in Jail ( Then Take All You Can Get For Life) Get some Dignity....An injust system.......

[rohlm50212]

The only winners in a Divorce are the Lawyers

[blazes]

You agree that some old dude being able post pictures of girls he is banging 1/2 his age on Facebook is more important than taking care of his child or children. He quit his job as an IP lawyer and became underemployed voluntarily so he could run away to Thailand and bang younger women. Cool. He can do that all he wants after his child is 18 or provided he can still provide the same support after voluntarily making himself underemployed.

The sad part is running away and not spending time with his child.

Submaniac may not be telling complete story here. His child support would have been calculated based on the child spending X number of days with him. If he took off to Thailand and child not spending X days with him, child support obligations would increase. Perhaps he simply could not afford the increased amount, but he should have never left if he could not afford to pay his debt after leaving.

Actually, after the divorce (he lost custody of his kids, and the wife basically alienated his kids from him), he went through a serious bout of depression. His practice languished, and he was facing discipline for the state bar for not being able to account for client funds. He actually is still on suspension and not able to practice until restitution was paid. He's basically working as a paralegal in a small family law firm in Ventura. (That is my idea of hell). It is a very common practice for one parent to alienate the kids from the other parent.

You seem awfully judgmental, and it is apparently easy for you to pass judgment. But he was going through real hard times, and was really going through some depression issues, and if I were him, I probably would have been depressed too. He lost his house, all his property in the divorce. He had precious little left. He was unable to work in the states due to his bar suspension. Yes, I would have been depressed. I mean what do you want him to do, kill himself? A friend had a place in Bangkok, and he managed to find good paying work at an honorable profession. It was just being able to teach which he loved.

"He should never have left if he could not afford to pay his debt after leaving"? A lot of people will never be able to pay off the debt. If someone goes through a hard time (and yes, I consider depression to be a legitimate thing if you have lost everything in your life), what are you going to do? How are you going to pay off hundreds of thousands of dollars? If the debt is not immediately paid, you now have compound interest on the debt. You really won't be able to pay it off.

No time to get past first paragraph, but I have zero sympathy for any lawyer that misappropriates client funds. Inexcusable and a reflection on the person.

Most humans have been through really difficult times. I went through a divorce I did not want after 17 years of marriage when my children were 12 and 13 because I was married to a career and spent my weekends traveling and racing GT3 Cup. I was initially angry because I provided well for the family, but I was selfish and brought this on myself. My ex and I are great friends now and my life is better than ever. Hotter younger wife and the most amazing 3 year old daughter ever.

As men, sometimes we have to buck up and be a man through the difficult times and just do the right thing. Abandoning children because our feelings got or we did not get our way is not the right thing. Perhaps if your friend would have kept himself together, not misappropriated client funds, not run off to Thailand and not have abandoned his children, his life like mine would have turned out better on the back end.

Karma is a beotch.

I am sure we are all very glad that it turned out "better on the back end". Some men are driven to that, they say....

[capcc76]

Most humans have been through really difficult times. I went through a divorce I did not want after 17 years of marriage when my children were 12 and 13 because I was married to a career and spent my weekends traveling and racing GT3 Cup. I was initially angry because I provided well for the family, but I was selfish and brought this on myself. My ex and I are great friends now and my life is better than ever. Hotter younger wife and the most amazing 3 year old daughter ever.

Divorce with teen children doesn't give the woman quite the same strength as divorce with under 10s.

The woman can say what she wants, make any unsupported allergations anyone can think of, and the children get protected from the man.

When they are teens, the court speaks with the children and listens to them a lot more.

Anyway this guy loses his job (fairly or not) but he is still expected to pay the same as if he was still employed and employable.

How is that fair in any way, shape or form.

Don't get me wrong, I made a lot of money from representing these women, and victimizing these men.

But that doesn't make the system or the situation fair or just.

Duty and moral responsibility to pay child support exists equally whether the child is under 10 or over 10. Unlike a lot of emotional males that lose their heads and want to fight over the TV dinner in the freezer and prohibit the child from ever being around any of mom's future boyfriends, I sucked it up. I knew what was at stake, what the outcome would be and my ex and I did a joint petition/MDA with a lot of assets and money at stake.

Unfortunately, a lot of domestic lawyers let their client's fight over ridiculous crap that hurts them in the long run because, as you said, they "made a lot of money from representing these women" without regard to what is the best and most economical solution.

RE: Sub's example

A noncustodial should pay same amount when they intentionally become under employed. If sub's guy misappropriated client funds, and one would not lose their law license unless they actually did misappropriate client funds, he committed a crime and I have no sympathy if a court refuses to modify the child support obligation. That being said, the Court would very likely have modified his child support obligation if he truly lost his license and had to work at a job making less money. This is actually an easy matter for a domestic lawyer with some sense. Hire an expert and present testimony that he was depressed and made some poor choices under duress or while depressed. Judge's love giving people a second chance.

The problem is that the guy apparently committed a crime, lost his license and then set sail for Thailand to evade his consequences and responsibilities so he could mess around with younger Thai women and start a new life. I am totally fine with that. He, however, should have attempted to modify his child support obligations and made dang sure he could meet his obligations before leaving the country to live In Thailand.

RE: Women saying anything

Either side can say anything and I have seen this back fire on women as well as men. The absolute quickest way to lose custody or experience the wrath of the court is by making false allegations of abuse to gain leverage in a custody matter.

If you, as a lawyer, knowingly presented such evidence to gain leverage in a domestic case (ala your victimizing men statement), you are a disgrace to our profession and the reason lawyers have a bad name.

People victimize themselves with poor choices. You don't have that power. You may think you do, but you don't.

[sumtingwong]

My point is that an adult woman has the equal obligation to support her children. Both the father and mother should have to pay equal child support into a secured account for the children, to only be used on the children regardless of whom they live with. It is called equal rights.

Besides that, why is it the state pays far less support for the children under their care?

[rohlm50212]

Whats really strange to me is allot of Dads in our modern world are good breadwinners, but the White Ladies full of Hamburgers And Pizza could care or less if Dad is happy, they want the $$$ without having to be a good woman/wife ...And the structure supports it....Thats why in other countries ladies have no rights....If they have a good man, they do whatever it takes to Keep Him....

[rohlm50212]

My point is that an adult woman has the equal obligation to support her children. Both the father and mother should have to pay equal child support into a secured account for the children, to only be used on the children regardless of whom they live with. It is called equal rights.

Besides that, why is it the state pays far less support for the children under their care?

As long as you get your 200 per hr RIGHT? Been there done that....My marrage counseller was a Dike....LOL

[capcc76]

The only winners in a Divorce are the Lawyers

Out of all your manic statements in this thread, this is the only rationale statement you have made. Wow, just reading your stuff . . . If you came across like that during a deposition or in court before a judge . .

A lot of divorce lawyers without sufficient business or that are just greedy bastards unnecessary run up large bills rather than sitting down at the very beginning, counseling their clients and saying this is reality. This is what will happen. We can fight over everything and I will be happy to take your money fighting over what ever you want to fight about it. This, however, is not the prudent course and in the end you will get nothing more except a large bill and you risk pissing the judge off and hurting your position. I constantly tell my client's when something is bad idea and a waste of their resources even though it would benefit me financially. Unfortunately, some lawyers may place their needs a head of their client's needs and those lawyers are a disgrace to our profession. Luckily, I encounter few of those types as I primarily represent large cap international corporations and musicians.

[capcc76]

Whats really strange to me is allot of Dads in our modern world are good breadwinners, but the White Ladies full of Hamburgers And Pizza could care or less if Dad is happy, they want the $$$ without having to be a good woman/wife ...And the structure supports it....Thats why in other countries ladies have no rights....If they have a good man, they do whatever it takes to Keep Him....

They have medication for this and you need it. These statements reflect a disgraceful man that is not capable of being in a mature, giving relationship. People like you get shafted in the Court system, because people like you are the problem and need to be shafted based upon your outlook and apparent treatment of women.

Edited July 1, 2014 by capcc76

[capcc76]

You agree that some old dude being able post pictures of girls he is banging 1/2 his age on Facebook is more important than taking care of his child or children. He quit his job as an IP lawyer and became underemployed voluntarily so he could run away to Thailand and bang younger women. Cool. He can do that all he wants after his child is 18 or provided he can still provide the same support after voluntarily making himself underemployed.

The sad part is running away and not spending time with his child.

Submaniac may not be telling complete story here. His child support would have been calculated based on the child spending X number of days with him. If he took off to Thailand and child not spending X days with him, child support obligations would increase. Perhaps he simply could not afford the increased amount, but he should have never left if he could not afford to pay his debt after leaving.

Actually, after the divorce (he lost custody of his kids, and the wife basically alienated his kids from him), he went through a serious bout of depression. His practice languished, and he was facing discipline for the state bar for not being able to account for client funds. He actually is still on suspension and not able to practice until restitution was paid. He's basically working as a paralegal in a small family law firm in Ventura. (That is my idea of hell). It is a very common practice for one parent to alienate the kids from the other parent.

You seem awfully judgmental, and it is apparently easy for you to pass judgment. But he was going through real hard times, and was really going through some depression issues, and if I were him, I probably would have been depressed too. He lost his house, all his property in the divorce. He had precious little left. He was unable to work in the states due to his bar suspension. Yes, I would have been depressed. I mean what do you want him to do, kill himself? A friend had a place in Bangkok, and he managed to find good paying work at an honorable profession. It was just being able to teach which he loved.

"He should never have left if he could not afford to pay his debt after leaving"? A lot of people will never be able to pay off the debt. If someone goes through a hard time (and yes, I consider depression to be a legitimate thing if you have lost everything in your life), what are you going to do? How are you going to pay off hundreds of thousands of dollars? If the debt is not immediately paid, you now have compound interest on the debt. You really won't be able to pay it off.

No time to get past first paragraph, but I have zero sympathy for any lawyer that misappropriates client funds. Inexcusable and a reflection on the person.

Most humans have been through really difficult times. I went through a divorce I did not want after 17 years of marriage when my children were 12 and 13 because I was married to a career and spent my weekends traveling and racing GT3 Cup. I was initially angry because I provided well for the family, but I was selfish and brought this on myself. My ex and I are great friends now and my life is better than ever. Hotter younger wife and the most amazing 3 year old daughter ever.

As men, sometimes we have to buck up and be a man through the difficult times and just do the right thing. Abandoning children because our feelings got or we did not get our way is not the right thing. Perhaps if your friend would have kept himself together, not misappropriated client funds, not run off to Thailand and not have abandoned his children, his life like mine would have turned out better on the back end.

Karma is a beotch.

I am sure we are all very glad that it turned out "better on the back end". Some men are driven to that, they say....

That is the way of the world. When going through difficult times, keep your side of the street clean, do right, don't be selfish and things always work out better than we can imagine. Too many men are wusses incapable of dealing with a little bit of pain. They react impulsively, attempt to hurt others and create confusion around them, make poor decisions and ultimately make their situations worse. You can ridicule positive messages all you want. Perhaps it is a difficult pill to swallow for some who already made poor choices they cannot undo.

[parmo2]

Only men are held to be responsible citizens by western governments , women have been given so many rights but without any extra responsibilities .

40 years of making laws exclusively in favour of women , all paid for by the 70-75% male taxes governments harvest from men and spend mostly on females , why ?

[parmo2]

You agree that some old dude being able post pictures of girls he is banging 1/2 his age on Facebook is more important than taking care of his child or children. He quit his job as an IP lawyer and became underemployed voluntarily so he could run away to Thailand and bang younger women. Cool. He can do that all he wants after his child is 18 or provided he can still provide the same support after voluntarily making himself underemployed.

The sad part is running away and not spending time with his child.

Submaniac may not be telling complete story here. His child support would have been calculated based on the child spending X number of days with him. If he took off to Thailand and child not spending X days with him, child support obligations would increase. Perhaps he simply could not afford the increased amount, but he should have never left if he could not afford to pay his debt after leaving.

Actually, after the divorce (he lost custody of his kids, and the wife basically alienated his kids from him), he went through a serious bout of depression. His practice languished, and he was facing discipline for the state bar for not being able to account for client funds. He actually is still on suspension and not able to practice until restitution was paid. He's basically working as a paralegal in a small family law firm in Ventura. (That is my idea of hell). It is a very common practice for one parent to alienate the kids from the other parent.

You seem awfully judgmental, and it is apparently easy for you to pass judgment. But he was going through real hard times, and was really going through some depression issues, and if I were him, I probably would have been depressed too. He lost his house, all his property in the divorce. He had precious little left. He was unable to work in the states due to his bar suspension. Yes, I would have been depressed. I mean what do you want him to do, kill himself? A friend had a place in Bangkok, and he managed to find good paying work at an honorable profession. It was just being able to teach which he loved.

"He should never have left if he could not afford to pay his debt after leaving"? A lot of people will never be able to pay off the debt. If someone goes through a hard time (and yes, I consider depression to be a legitimate thing if you have lost everything in your life), what are you going to do? How are you going to pay off hundreds of thousands of dollars? If the debt is not immediately paid, you now have compound interest on the debt. You really won't be able to pay it off.

No time to get past first paragraph, but I have zero sympathy for any lawyer that misappropriates client funds. Inexcusable and a reflection on the person.

Most humans have been through really difficult times. I went through a divorce I did not want after 17 years of marriage when my children were 12 and 13 because I was married to a career and spent my weekends traveling and racing GT3 Cup. I was initially angry because I provided well for the family, but I was selfish and brought this on myself. My ex and I are great friends now and my life is better than ever. Hotter younger wife and the most amazing 3 year old daughter ever.

As men, sometimes we have to buck up and be a man through the difficult times and just do the right thing. Abandoning children because our feelings got or we did not get our way is not the right thing. Perhaps if your friend would have kept himself together, not misappropriated client funds, not run off to Thailand and not have abandoned his children, his life like mine would have turned out better on the back end.

Karma is a beotch.

I am sure we are all very glad that it turned out "better on the back end". Some men are driven to that, they say....

That is the way of the world. When going through difficult times, keep your side of the street clean, do right, don't be selfish and things always work out better than we can imagine. Too many men are wusses incapable of dealing with a little bit of pain. They react impulsively, attempt to hurt others and create confusion around them, make poor decisions and ultimately make their situations worse. You can ridicule positive messages all you want. Perhaps it is a difficult pill to swallow for some who already made poor choices they cannot undo.

Relationship differences are 50/50 , but only gender is hounded by the state , and only females are allowed to use the power of the state

[parmo2]

You agree that some old dude being able post pictures of girls he is banging 1/2 his age on Facebook is more important than taking care of his child or children. He quit his job as an IP lawyer and became underemployed voluntarily so he could run away to Thailand and bang younger women. Cool. He can do that all he wants after his child is 18 or provided he can still provide the same support after voluntarily making himself underemployed.

The sad part is running away and not spending time with his child.

Submaniac may not be telling complete story here. His child support would have been calculated based on the child spending X number of days with him. If he took off to Thailand and child not spending X days with him, child support obligations would increase. Perhaps he simply could not afford the increased amount, but he should have never left if he could not afford to pay his debt after leaving.

Actually, after the divorce (he lost custody of his kids, and the wife basically alienated his kids from him), he went through a serious bout of depression. His practice languished, and he was facing discipline for the state bar for not being able to account for client funds. He actually is still on suspension and not able to practice until restitution was paid. He's basically working as a paralegal in a small family law firm in Ventura. (That is my idea of hell). It is a very common practice for one parent to alienate the kids from the other parent.

You seem awfully judgmental, and it is apparently easy for you to pass judgment. But he was going through real hard times, and was really going through some depression issues, and if I were him, I probably would have been depressed too. He lost his house, all his property in the divorce. He had precious little left. He was unable to work in the states due to his bar suspension. Yes, I would have been depressed. I mean what do you want him to do, kill himself? A friend had a place in Bangkok, and he managed to find good paying work at an honorable profession. It was just being able to teach which he loved.

"He should never have left if he could not afford to pay his debt after leaving"? A lot of people will never be able to pay off the debt. If someone goes through a hard time (and yes, I consider depression to be a legitimate thing if you have lost everything in your life), what are you going to do? How are you going to pay off hundreds of thousands of dollars? If the debt is not immediately paid, you now have compound interest on the debt. You really won't be able to pay it off.

No time to get past first paragraph, but I have zero sympathy for any lawyer that misappropriates client funds. Inexcusable and a reflection on the person.

Most humans have been through really difficult times. I went through a divorce I did not want after 17 years of marriage when my children were 12 and 13 because I was married to a career and spent my weekends traveling and racing GT3 Cup. I was initially angry because I provided well for the family, but I was selfish and brought this on myself. My ex and I are great friends now and my life is better than ever. Hotter younger wife and the most amazing 3 year old daughter ever.

As men, sometimes we have to buck up and be a man through the difficult times and just do the right thing. Abandoning children because our feelings got or we did not get our way is not the right thing. Perhaps if your friend would have kept himself together, not misappropriated client funds, not run off to Thailand and not have abandoned his children, his life like mine would have turned out better on the back end.

Karma is a beotch.

I am sure we are all very glad that it turned out "better on the back end". Some men are driven to that, they say....

That is the way of the world. When going through difficult times, keep your side of the street clean, do right, don't be selfish and things always work out better than we can imagine. Too many men are wusses incapable of dealing with a little bit of pain. They react impulsively, attempt to hurt others and create confusion around them, make poor decisions and ultimately make their situations worse. You can ridicule positive messages all you want. Perhaps it is a difficult pill to swallow for some who already made poor choices they cannot undo.

Relationship differences are 50/50 , but only gender is hounded by the state , and only females are allowed to use the power of the state

[capcc76]

Only men are held to be responsible citizens by western governments , women have been given so many rights but without any extra responsibilities .

40 years of making laws exclusively in favour of women , all paid for by the 70-75% male taxes governments harvest from men and spend mostly on females , why ?

This not completely true. Courts will hammer a noncustodial deadbeat mother as quick as a noncustodial deadbeat father.

At the end if the day it does not matter, dads should still pay. Disconcerting that some may view it okay not to pay because they think law are uneven handed. It's their kids and they should do the right thing regardless.

This stuff just goes in circles. Not sure if it denial or just a bunch of bitter dudes whose wife left them, but the rationales being thrown around are neither logical nor valid.

Edited July 1, 2014 by capcc76

[MAJIC]

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.)

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

Som Nam Na!

Karma sometimes takes awhile!

[rohlm50212]

Whats really strange to me is allot of Dads in our modern world are good breadwinners, but the White Ladies full of Hamburgers And Pizza could care or less if Dad is happy, they want the $$$ without having to be a good woman/wife ...And the structure supports it....Thats why in other countries ladies have no rights....If they have a good man, they do whatever it takes to Keep Him....

They have medication for this and you need it. These statements reflect a disgraceful man that is not capable of being in a mature, giving relationship. People like you get shafted in the Court system, because people like you are the problem and need to be shafted based upon your outlook and apparent treatment of women.

Funny, My Girls lived thru the Horror of a Sick mom and a bad court decision, I paid and took care of them because Thats what a Dad does, they told the Judje why they were living with Dad and her Lawyer dumped her on the spot...My kids and myself lived the reality of The Litigation Omnimous irresponsible Modern world....Where do your Clown statementts come from? Reading a Book? Had a Out of control sick Mom backed by the Law

While Dad worked....bitter because i had to pay? NO..

Because of the Lawyers/ AND TEXTBOOK JUDGES that drug my kids thru SHIT while I paid their bills, and to do anything about it, PI IE IE IE ON THE DADS PAYROLL...Ill take whatever you are taking...PS REMARRIED WITH A NEW CHILD AND GRANDGHILDREN SO GO READ YOUR FAIRYTALES

Edited July 1, 2014 by rohlm50212