lunes, 29 de noviembre de 2010

Oh shi...

I found this entry about two differents situation about a same problem and how two goverments deal with it.

Taken from The Daily Mail:

They are both the feckless fathers of a legion of children by many different women.

In Britain, Keith Macdonald is a jobless 25-year-old who has produced up to 15 children by 14 mothers, costing the taxpayer at least £1.5million in benefits.

In America, Howard Veal has fathered 23 children by 14 women, and owes an astonishing $533,000 – that’s £337,000 – in child support payments.

But while their shameless lifestyles may be equally unappealing, there is one thing that separates them.

As Macdonald continues to live an easy, workless life in Britain, his American counterpart is beginning a four-year prison sentence for failing to support his offspring.

In an impassioned outburst unlikely to be heard from a British judge, Veal was told he was an ‘insult to every responsible father who sacrifices to provide for their children’ by Michigan judge Denis Lieber.

Branding 44-year-old Veal a ‘poster child for irresponsibility’, Judge Lieber added: ‘Animals procreate, human beings are supposed to nurture their children. When you create a human being, I think you have a fundamental responsibility to provide for that child with necessities like food, clothing and shelter.’
The judge was so appalled that he far exceeded the sentencing guidelines, which called for Veal, from Muskegon, Michigan, to receive no more than six months in the county jail.

In Britain, Macdonald has eight children with another two on the way, all by different mothers. Since his story emerged last week, however, other women have come forward to claim he has up to 15 children.

He receives incapacity benefit for a bad back of up to £68.95 plus £44 a week for income support. He rarely works and contributes just £5 a week to support each child.

Unlike Veal, he has not been pursued for missing his child support payments. But their cases are very similar in other respects.
Like Macdonald, Veal has barely worked over the years, instead choosing to live largely on benefits. When he had a job for a few months last year, some money was taken from his wage to pay for his children, but it barely made a dent in what he owed.

His jailing followed a guilty plea he made in July to owing Sherri Black, the mother of two of his children, more than $60,000 (£38,000) in child support.
In seven years, Veal had paid just $87.75 (£55) for the two children, now aged 16 and 11.
Like Macdonald, Veal told the court he was contributing money from his unemployment benefit and had never refused to pay.

However, Mitchell Wood, Michigan’s assistant attorney general, had recommended that Veal’s behaviour justified a jail sentence because he was unlikely ever to make substantial inroads into what he owes, especially as there remain 14 outstanding cases against him.

In Britain, parents who refuse to pay can be jailed for up to six weeks, although they can get out as soon as they hand over the money.

The Child Support Agency, which stresses that the measure is a ‘last resort’, says that between November 2008 and October 2009, 800 offenders were given immediate or suspended prison sentences.

The CSA – which does not need to receive a complaint over non-payment to take action – can also confiscate the non-payer’s cars and motorbikes, take away his driving licence and remove money directly from his bank account.

However, the agency has been dogged by complaints about long delays, errors and failing to take action against offenders.

In 2006, the National Audit Office found that the CSA was spending 70p collecting every £1 of child maintenance from absent parents.

A House of Commons report last year warned that the cases of 275,000 parents waiting for child maintenance remain stuck in the CSA’s inadequate computer system.

Next year, responsibility for collecting child support will be transferred to the new Child Maintenance Enforcement Commission.

In the U.S., parents face fines and property confiscation and can even have their passport withheld along with their driving licence.

They can also be jailed for up to six months, although – as in Veal’s case – this is only a guideline.

Critics of the U.S. system say jailing non-payers only adds to the state’s burden. Sherri Black agreed, saying: ‘I’m pleased he’s been jailed but I’d rather have him pay the money. Now my taxes will go to support him in prison.’

Last night Norman Wells, of Family and Youth Concern, said: ‘Whether or not a prison sentence is the most appropriate sanction, there can be little doubt that we are far too complacent about feckless fathers in the UK.

‘We need to send out a clear message that fathers are far more than sperm donors and make them take proper responsibility for the children they have a part in bringing into the world.’

Guess what? He choose you

Enhanced by Zemanta

8 comentarios:

  1. The standard Daily Mail solution is quite appropriate in this case: "cut 'is goolies off!"

  2. Nice to see a English version of this blog :)

  3. well, dont know why they couldnt just pay or stop having kids

  4. Meh, my daughters sperm donor left and has had nothing to do with her since she was born, she is now 9. I have done with out his help and to be honest, I don't mind him being a dead beat because I don't have to allow him around my child. I get to raise her the way I choose and with the values I believe are important. Dead beat dad to me says the momma wants money for spreading her legs (most of the time) filing on someone who wants nothing to do with the baby is just arrogance IMHO.

  5. freaking nuts, but thats just part of the world we live in.

  6. Why in the hell would you make that many babies? Granted, they're not around for any of them, but still. Get snipped and you wouldn't have to worry about this nonsense.

  7. >Daily Mail
    Stopped reading right there