Title IV-D of the Social Security Act was intended to reduce the drain on federal spending under Title IV-A (food stamps, etc.), now known as TANF, by putting pressure on wilfully absent lower income fathers to return and support their children.  The Title IV-D Block Grant Funds flow from the Federal Government to the States and into their Department of Health and Human Services’ (DHHS) Administration for Children and Families’ (ACF) and the Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE); then to the Counties, to the County Friend of the Courts, the Circuit Courts, and also to the Office of the Attorney General in relation to the amount of Child Support that is Ordered and ultimately collected. A special incentive for every dollar of support that is Ordered & collected is given to the States competitively according to their effectiveness in collecting it.  Without any eligibility requirements a huge financial incentive is given to the States to include middle to upper income divorcing parents as they provide an opportunity to Order higher amounts of Child Support and they are more collectable.

The States soon realized that the lack of qualifications as to  “wilfully absent,” (i.e. now noncustodial parent), or income bracket (no longer restricted to lower income) allowed them to acquire additional federal grant block moneys by producing absent parents in the middle and upper income brackets. Moreover, through the two funding arms of Title IV-D the States can make a profit.  This has turned into an assembly line of family carnage for Michigan with profits of $34,000,000.00 in 1996 and $43,000,000.00 in 1998 alone.  The State of Michigan shares the profits in the form of incentives with the counties based upon their production of and performance in collecting said support. These moneys then flow through to the county courts paying the salaries of those who manufactured the single parent homes in the first place. Like Don Quixote on steroids, the family law institutions and employees go beyond chasing imagined enemies, when they cannot find enough of them, they simply manufacture them. At this point, we need look little further to understand why fit, willing, and able parents are not allowed to continue their direct parental support by raising their children in their own homes, and why they are routinely denied access to the children they love.

Moreover, this loophole in Title IV-D has resulted in a burgeoning multi-billion dollar expense for the Federal Government of what was intended to be a recoupment of federal dollars being spent on TANF. The total annual expense to tax paying Americans is now one hundred billion dollars ($100,000,000,000.00) per year! The details are available in the expose´ The One Hundred Billion Dollar Man. This must be one of the greatest wastes of federal taxpayer dollars in American history. And this malignant waste contiues to swell.

And, what has this meant to our families, parents, and more particularly non-custodial parents?  Title IV-D has turned our government that is supposed to be For, Of, and By the people, inside out. The only proper question before the courts of whether there is demonstrable and recognised neglect or abuse, or whether a parent is unfit, unwilling, or unable (In Re Troxel) to be one, is not raised. But rather, the State lawlessly interjects itself to determine which is the “better” parent and which is the alleged “inferior” parent. The States’ family law courts then force the “inferior” parent into a diminished relationship with their child(ren), and the child(ren) usually lose access to an otherwise involved, loving, and devoted parent.  Furthermore, the noncustodial parent typically suffers extremely high child support obligations, well over what their state would pay for fostering a child. These child support orders increased 200% to 400% from 1994 to 2008 without any scientific justification. Single parent families and fatherless children are also on the rise; and, the actions of the State indicate an utter loss of what is in the “best interest of the children.”  In practice it is now the organs of the State that determine who will bring up the children, and how much is to be spent on them – without any oversight of the paying noncustodial parent. Blatantly, these laws are implemented in discriminatory fashion against men at a national rate of 9:1. As Leon Koziol stated; family law in the United States is the “last form of institutionalized discrimination.” All fuelled by the States’ abuse of the loophole in Title IV-D.

Put in the terms of our constitution; the Liberty Interests in our children as expressed in the Declaration of Independence’s Right to the Pursuit of Happiness, and as affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of In Re Troxel, is routinely violated; numerous and repeated violations of substantive Due Process rights go unchecked; evidence in support of creating single parent families is often allowed into evidence and/or fabricated, and evidence that would otherwise support joint custody arrangements is denied admission into the court records or destroyed. Moreover, in Michigan, to assure the receipt of Title IV-D federal block grant funds, an unconstitutional debtor’s prison scheme has been erected in criminal statute MCL 750.165; the Office of the Attorney General, Family Law Division makes arrests and continues prosecution when they know that no crime has been committed in the state; a broken Public Defender program that does not provide representation that is capable of putting the prosecution to the crucible of meaningful testing is left uncorrected; wilful violations of Oaths of Office by State employees is routine; and, State Criminal Court proceedings conducted knowingly without jurisdiction continue, as in the Paul H. Deering case.

The staff of the Oakland County Circuit Court (OCCC), Michigan, are known to be one of the most aggressive in establishing sole custody, limited visitation, and imputing “phantom” income which results in the rocketing child support orders we hear of so often. They do so in order to justify their state employment by ordering and subsequently collecting on these mounting child support obligations – the higher the obligation the more difficult it is to pay and the more the staff of the OCCC has to work at collecting. As noted above, this is not an expense on the State and county budget, it is rather a profit making tool as the federal funds far exceed the State’s expense in enforcing child support. The Friend of the Courts and family law courts are the darlings of the State budget. Former Friend of the Court employee Carol Rhodes couldn’t have put it more succinctly – link here to see her YouTube video.

In the simplest of terms, the State of Michigan has erected an assembly line of family carnage wherein our children and families are sacrificed on the alter of the State budget – one parent families and fatherless children for Title IV-D federal block grant funds. This assembly line of carnage goes beyond the judiciary. As former attorney General Mike Cox bragged, he was actually turning a profit for the State via the Family Law division of the Attorney General’s office. Apparently, for these State actors, it is of no concern that children are suffering needlessly, and that from the office of the friend of the court, the family law courts, up to the family law division of the State’s attorney general’s office they are violating 28 USC 241 & 242 – the federal anti discrimination statutes (discriminating agaisnt men at a rate of 9:1).

What term aptly describes this scheme? Pathetic, demented, sinister, depraved, a contemptable scourge? What do you think? How will our children judge our State and our courts, and more importantly; how will they judge us?

For further information on how Title IV-D corrupts our political system please see the following posts:

How Federal Welfare Funding Drives Judicial Discretion in Child-Custody Determinations and Domestic Relations Matters.
      by Lary Holland and Jason Bottomley

Title IV-D Money Flow
      by Robert Pedersen

Federal Incentives Make Children Fatherless
        by Phyllis Schlafly 

How the Failures of Welfare Reform Created Our Lawless Courts (Part One)
      by Doug Parris

How the Failures of Welfare Reform Created Our Lawless Courts (Part Two) 

      by Terri Lynn Tersak