Tuesday, June 28, 2005


I found this article reading Masculiste. It is an excellent representation of how the family courts violate our civil liberties every day.
Is Staying Home with Children "Shirking Work" For Child Support Purposes? The Wisconsin Supreme Court Says No
Tuesday, Jun. 14, 2005

Jane Chen was a well-paid Wisconsin anesthesiologist. But at the age of 43, she decided to "retire" to stay home with her three school-age children.

Even in 2005, Chen's decision was hardly unusual or remarkable: Women (and sometimes men) frequently forego employment, even lucrative employment, in order to stay home with children.

What is remarkable and unusual, though, is that Chen's decision landed her in court. Her ex-husband argued that, by staying home, she was "shirking" her responsibility to provide financial support to their children. And he complained that due to her decision, a court was now ordering him to pay $4000 more a month in child support.

In Chen v. Warner, the Wisconsin Supreme Court recently sided with Jane Chen. It held that her decision was reasonable under the circumstances, and did not constitute "shirking."

Other states, however, have ruled differently. And overall, America features a checkered legal landscape on the treatment of divorced parents who forego income in favor of at-home childrearing.

Some Background on Child Support Law

Once, only fathers were legally required to pay child support. Now, under the law, all parents have a legal duty to support their children.

In a family with married parents, that obligation is enforced mainly through the abuse-and-neglect laws. Parents who fail to support their children risk losing them, and may even face criminal penalties. click here for the original article>


Blogger One man said...

I found it interesting that the article starts out practicaly accusing the man of filing the motion for reduced child support, when in fact, SHE was the one who filed for an increase. Strange for such a well balanced and well written article.

6/28/2005 04:52:00 PM  
Anonymous Mark said...

What about "imputed income"? That's what Perry was complaining about?

And my ex did the same thing as this bitch. Why the unfairness?

6/28/2005 07:14:00 PM  
Blogger The Geezer said...

Mark, Mark, Mark.

Don't you know the rules? Only men get imputed income, women, if they impute, are assessed at the grand sum of $1700 per month, according to a sympathetic SEO.


6/29/2005 07:49:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Main