Appetite for family destruction | WHAT REALLY HAPPENED

Appetite for family destruction

A little-noticed commission is beginning work in Virginia that has major implications nationwide for both families and governmental ethics. Every four years, each state is required to review its guidelines for child support. In Virginia the outcome may be less remarkable than the process.

The last review in 1999 was a classic case of the foxes guarding the hen house. The review panel was selected by the director of the state’s Division of Child Support Enforcement (DCSE), and at least 10 of the 12 members derived income from the divorce system: two judges, four lawyers, a feminist, an enforcement official, two custodial parents, and a legislator. All these people have a stake in encouraging divorce and criminalizing fathers and therefore in making child support as onerous as possible. "By virtue of the Director of DCSE deciding its make-up, conflict-of-interest concerns are both evident and also reflective of much larger improprieties."

Webmaster's Commentary: 

Sent in by a reader in response to the "Walking Wallet" comment below.

As a side note, horror stories like this were common at the height of the Feminist male-bash era in the mid 1990s. Child protect9ve and social service agencies across the country adopted highly biased views regarding men, to the point where families were routinely destroyed purely for financial and political gain. I recall hearing a speech given by a feminist working for the Los Angeles Child Protective Services and it was her view that all men molested their children and it was only a matter of time before she would find the evidence and remove the child from the home. This was about the same time Andrea Dworkin was calling for women to randomly shoot men to keep them in their place. I recall looking at the constant dehumanization of men and forced conversion to walking wallet and thinking that the government wanted to make men socially disposable in anticipation of a major war.