Pearl - The TRUTH behind Child Support Corruption？｜ THE SITDOWN With @thisisshah

00:00:00.000 what up guys welcome to the just pearly things youtube channel and welcome to the sit down today

00:00:05.120 i have a special guest welcome to the show shaw so i invited shaw on the show today because um

00:00:12.940 you were in my comments or maybe i saw your video i think you reacted to something of mine or

00:00:17.960 whatever i uh i made a video where it was reacting to kind of whatever podcast and fresh and fit

00:00:24.160 having a kind of beef and you commented on that video so that's how we kind of first got introduced

00:00:29.420 I don't I don't remember exactly. But I just remember you said you worked at a child support

00:00:35.500 office. Yeah, yeah, I worked at the Department of Child Support Services for five years. And that

00:00:41.640 was here in Sacramento, California. And I was a child support officer. So I started off as a level

00:00:47.160 one. And then I became a level two. And then after a little bit more, I got promoted to a level three

00:00:52.540 and I became a trainer. So you know, at the agency, we're the guys who are starting, you know,

00:00:58.060 lawsuits basically on the state's behalf in order to get child support to establish paternity i would

00:01:03.660 do the cotton swabs and people's cheeks for the dna tests all that kind of fun stuff really so 1.00

00:01:09.980 wait just uh so you would be the person that the the guy would go to the state and say this isn't

00:01:15.740 my kid yes absolutely he would sue the state uh well usually when that happened we were suing him

00:01:21.660 first right because usually you have a let's say you have a mom and you have a child and the child's

00:01:27.020 born out of wedlock and nobody was at the hospital during this kid's birth. So we have no, I'll tell

00:01:32.560 you later about declaration of paternity, voluntary declaration of paternity or no birth certificate

00:01:37.760 signed by dad. And typically a lot of our cases were welfare cases. So mom and this kid, you know,

00:01:42.960 go on welfare. Our agency gets a task from the welfare office and, you know, we do what we do

00:01:47.960 and we send out a lawsuit. This guy gets served and we're like, hey, we're suing you to establish

00:01:52.320 paternity and also a child support amount so we can send money home to this kid, basically.

00:01:57.020 So they'd come in after they were served and say, hey, wait a minute, I'm not the dad.

00:02:01.380 And, you know, I'd run them through the process then.

00:02:03.540 And would you only would you take mostly cases like that or would it be a mix?

00:02:08.240 You know, I think when I was last there, it was close to about 50 to 60 percent were welfare cases.

00:02:15.560 So you got to one thing that people have to understand is the entire federal child support program is kind of inextricably linked with the welfare program.

00:02:23.260 And it was really because of the rise in welfare cases that the entire child support program was created in the first place in 1975.

00:02:32.540 So, you know, what you had basically after World War II, you know, a lot of guys died on the battlefield and they left widows and orphans, well, widows and their children.

00:02:40.480 And somebody needed to take care of them.

00:02:43.120 So at that time, the welfare program was created as an expansion of the Social Security program.

00:02:49.180 So it became a Title IVA that gave us welfare.

00:02:52.440 And it was mainly for these widows and their children.

00:02:55.000 By the time the 70s were all around, they looked at the welfare caseload and the majority of them were not widows.

00:03:00.300 The fathers were, in fact, still alive.

00:03:02.760 And it was a problem because it was costing a lot of money.

00:03:05.380 So Congress is like, what are we going to do about this?

00:03:07.600 Kids are being born out of wedlock like never before.

00:03:10.100 The dads are still around.

00:03:11.500 They're not living together, whatever.

00:03:12.740 And they're all living off welfare.

00:03:13.860 What do we do?

00:03:14.380 So they created child support as a kind of enforcement arm to go out there and recoup the tax dollars that were being expended as welfare.

00:03:23.000 So in 1975, the child support program was born and states adopted that.

00:03:28.460 Basically, if a state wants to have a welfare program, if they want to get federal welfare funds, they have to have a child support program at the same time.

00:03:36.060 And those two kind of interplay with each other.

00:03:38.620 You know, it's interesting.

00:03:39.640 So there's a carrot and stick approach there.

00:03:41.180 So basically, the child support office and the welfare office are linked, is what you're saying?

00:03:47.240 Yes, yes. I mean, child support policy is completely born out of welfare policy, basically.

00:03:53.420 Because they figured out that all of these women on welfare had a dad that was still alive and that they could charge him, basically.

00:04:00.620 Exactly, exactly. Around that time, there was a lot of debate over this.

00:04:04.040 They were trying to figure out what to do because the data had come back and they're like, okay, these aren't widows with women who lost their husband.

00:04:10.960 They're women having children out of wedlock. 1.00

00:04:13.040 That's where you got the term welfare queen. 1.00

00:04:14.500 So welfare queen and deadbeat dad started to become popular terms around this time.

00:04:19.140 And there were some different ideas thrown about that time.

00:04:22.500 There was one called the Sugarman proposal.

00:04:24.780 And basically he, it was two guys.

00:04:27.320 I can't remember Sugarman's first name, but it was Sugarman and then I think Erwin Garfinkel.

00:04:30.860 And they basically proposed, let's expand social security.

00:04:33.320 And what we'll do is we'll basically charge everybody through their wages as an insurance

00:04:37.880 if they become a non-custodial parent later.

00:04:39.980 So they would expand social security. Everybody gets taxed a little bit more. And if someday in the future, somebody has a kid out of wedlock and that kid needs help, they would be able to tap into the social security fund. The government really didn't like that. Both sides were like, screw you. Let's go after the deadbeat dad. Okay. So they decided to then create the child support enforcement program. And when it started out, it was just for 4D. 4D is the social security. 4D is the child support federal program. It started out only working cases from the 4A program.

00:05:09.320 So if the mom was on, well, if the child was on welfare, then the child, the public child support agency would only focus on those welfare cases. But I think it was in 84, if I remember correctly, that it started to expand, basically. And what the child support system started doing was advertising its services to non-welfare families, non-welfare moms. And the reasoning behind that, they were receiving more funding from the federal government.

00:05:34.220 it was to say, you know, there are families right on the line here and they might be on welfare

00:05:38.200 sooner. So if you can get them child support faster, it should hopefully keep them off of it.

00:05:42.520 And I'm assuming it was a business, too, so they would make more money in some way the more women 1.00

00:05:47.460 were on welfare or no? Well, that's an interesting question. I mean, you know, the way the funding

00:05:52.360 works ultimately is based off of performance measures. So, you know, at that time, you had

00:05:57.160 a lot of kids being born out of wedlock and paternity was was mostly established through

00:06:01.940 marriage. So I think even California in like the late 1800s, part of the code was any issue of your

00:06:07.920 wife, you are presumed to be the father. So there's something called presumption of paternity

00:06:12.840 when it comes to marriage. That's a very specific legal term. And keep in mind, this has nothing to

00:06:17.480 do with biological paternity. One thing that I want people to know is like genetic tests weren't

00:06:21.300 a thing till the mid 90s. So you have years and years and years. It was that late. I didn't realize

00:06:26.680 that was such a new invention. That's the thing. And genetic testing was like a nuclear bomb in

00:06:31.600 this game you know what i mean because before that what you had you had blood tests i think in

00:06:35.960 the 70s and 80s but blood tests were were better for excluding someone as the father so mom would 0.97

00:06:40.580 say you know it might be this guy might be this guy might be this guy they would do blood tests

00:06:43.720 it wouldn't exactly point who the dad was but it would say it's definitely not this person it's

00:06:47.240 definitely not this person this guy's left it's probably him but we have years and years and years

00:06:51.680 and years of case law that established paternity based off of a functional relationship with the

00:06:56.400 child which is very different than a biological relationship with the child so when it comes to

00:07:01.080 things like custody, this starts to be a problem because the functional relationship matters more

00:07:05.500 in getting custody, where when it comes to child support, which is very specifically about getting

00:07:09.780 welfare money back, biological paternity starts to be used. And it's more about saying, you're

00:07:14.140 the dad, pay us. It's not about you're the dad, here, have a relationship with your child. So

00:07:18.920 what I'm trying to explain to you is that there's this overall theme of private family law and

00:07:24.100 public family law. And for the longest time in human history, private family law and public

00:07:29.320 family law were were separated there was a barrier there you know most kids were born within a

00:07:34.400 marriage it was i think in the 50s only five percent of children were born outside of marriage

00:07:38.460 and you know if you guys were going to get divorced which honestly was also relatively

00:07:42.460 rare back then especially with at-fault divorce you would go to you know a judge and a judge is

00:07:47.560 going to make these decisions um paternity wasn't an issue first of all because genetic tests weren't

00:07:52.340 really there to give definitive proof one way or another they did have paternity trials and those

00:07:56.560 were very tough, but you were going to be seen by a judge and they were going to make those

00:08:00.960 decisions. And the judges had the dexterity to make very specific decisions for your specific

00:08:05.640 case. As the child support system began to expand, especially in the mid 90s, it got so powerful

00:08:11.900 that it basically bullied its way into the private family law system. And that's why nowadays you have

00:08:17.680 a lot of issues where men are struggling with this system because the public family law system

00:08:22.260 will come in and it'll cause problems on the private side. And I know that's a lot I just

00:08:26.420 threw at you. Could you explain more of the private versus public? So sure. Do you mean

00:08:31.780 okay. Family child support separate from family court, like family court will decide how much

00:08:38.640 child. I don't know if they decide at least in the UK from what I understand, like the people

00:08:42.860 I've talked to here, the child, like you go to family court and then they, I don't know if the

00:08:48.000 judge says how much you make but they'll decide if the guy is on child support or not and then they

00:08:53.260 go to i can't remember the name of it but it's like a third party office is that sure um well i

00:08:58.560 could tell you and how it works in the u.s specifically is you have your family law courts

00:09:02.780 right and the family law courts basically envelope everything a family law court can decide on

00:09:08.120 marriage divorce they can decide on paternity they can decide on child and spousal support

00:09:12.680 division of assets all of these things okay and that's in california that's very specifically

00:09:17.300 called family law. Then you have family support court. Family support court is the public child

00:09:22.980 support system court, which is limited to only deciding on child support, child care and health

00:09:29.240 insurance for the kid. And it's very specifically for that. Custody is firmly lodged in the private

00:09:34.160 family law court where child support court has no bearing on that. Now, what's important to

00:09:40.740 understand is that private family law court can determine child support amounts. But what will

00:09:47.600 end up happening is, you know, a long time ago, that was more up to the judge. There was more

00:09:52.480 dexterity. As the public family law system grew, he started to get these things called guidelines

00:09:57.260 or guideline calculators. You know what I mean? So if dad thinks maybe this amount's appropriate,

00:10:02.560 mom can appeal to the public family law guideline calculator and say, I want guidelines. So her 1.00

00:10:07.360 attorney is going to be like, no, we want guidelines. Okay. Which is what the public

00:10:10.680 family law calculator says that everybody is entitled to as a fair state sanctioned amount

00:10:15.660 of a child support income based off of mom and dad's incomes in the custody parenting timeshare.

00:10:20.720 So just to give a little bit more background on that, stop me if it's too much, but basically,

00:10:25.020 you know, public family law is something that was essential to society, but it goes all the

00:10:29.540 way back to like English common law and poor laws very specifically, you know, because you always

00:10:33.520 had kids who maybe were born out of wedlock we didn't know who the dad was and you had people

00:10:38.080 who were in poverty and basically needed help from society at large now typically when you had that

00:10:43.920 happening society had laws that kind of infringe on a private citizen's rights because you are kind

00:10:49.680 of you know being a burden to society so now government either has to come in there maybe

00:10:53.680 they have to take the child put them in protective services maybe they have to give welfare all these

00:10:58.160 kinds of things so there are very specific laws that that govern that you know and for the most

00:11:02.560 part, that wasn't that big of a part of society until you started seeing more and more and more

00:11:07.820 and more of these kids being born out of wedlock, you know, so that starts in the 60s. And by the

00:11:12.820 time we get to, you know, I think 75, it was at about 25%, if I have my memory, right, and around

00:11:18.880 now, it's at about 45%, you know, so a lot of these kids were availing, you know, these mothers

00:11:23.860 with these children are availing themselves of the welfare, you know, public system, it's becoming a

00:11:28.680 cost to the public. So they needed to expand the enforcement of the public family law system to

00:11:33.740 get the men to pay for it in a way. It's kind of like getting men to pay for welfare. That's

00:11:38.160 exactly what it is, because, I mean, you're trying to get the money to recoup the government

00:11:43.180 treasury because they're they're expending that out to to the welfare. And, you know, there was a

00:11:48.560 there was a big change in the mid 90s. Basically, what happened in the in the mid 90s was the

00:11:53.760 program that was created, you know, way before was called AFDC, Aid to Families with Dependent

00:11:58.540 Children. And in the mid-90s, that changed to TANF. That's Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.

00:12:03.400 And, you know, from 1975, the Child Support Office was created. And from the mid-90s,

00:12:08.220 in this same bill that changed welfare, child support got beefed up. Okay. And I'm going to

00:12:12.800 try to explain this as quickly as I can without going into a huge college lecture here. But

00:12:17.640 basically what happened was, you know, people were getting mad, politicians were angry,

00:12:21.660 and they were just like hey you know we're these people are living off of welfare their whole

00:12:26.520 lives they're having more kids who then also live off welfare the problem is getting worse

00:12:31.120 child support you know when it's created is still kind of in its infancy and it's not that efficient

00:12:37.020 there's all these problems you know a guy might be in Tennessee one day and all of a sudden he's

00:12:41.540 in California and it was just not very efficient and there was all that kind of grumbling in the

00:12:47.420 air. And then in the mid 90s, during the Clinton administration, and even a little bit before that,

00:12:53.020 I think they were they were debating how do we about welfare reform, basically, you know,

00:12:58.180 people on both sides are trying to figure out what to do. And after a lot of debating,

00:13:02.540 they finally create this bill, which is the the welfare reform of the mid 90s, also called

00:13:07.820 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity and Reconciliation Act. So we call that Perora for 0.97

00:13:12.860 short that was 96 but and are these prior just in california are these federal that's federal

00:13:18.060 that's from congress okay yeah and what that law did is that it put time limits for welfare

00:13:23.900 recipients who are adults so instead of a mom getting part of a grant for the entire you know

00:13:28.780 18 years of her child's life she times out at two years but the child all the way up until they're 0.92

00:13:33.260 they're 18 still gets that would put more of an incentive for women to get child support because 1.00

00:13:38.540 Because the welfare stops, right?

00:13:41.800 The welfare stops for her specifically. 1.00

00:13:43.740 She's just getting it for the child.

00:13:44.920 So the reasoning back then was if we limit the amount of welfare they're getting, it

00:13:48.480 should incentivize them to, you know, go get child support. 0.91

00:13:51.820 Hopefully at the time they thought it would bring relations with the fathers and the child

00:13:55.380 closer if he was paying more.

00:13:57.160 You know, we kind of don't know if that didn't exactly work.

00:14:00.200 And then the other side of that was, you know, if mom gets cut off of welfare, they had programs

00:14:05.540 to get her to work.

00:14:06.340 So that's how you start getting this strong and independent woman propaganda coming at you, because you had these people kind of sandbagging society. Right. And how do we how do we get them off of this program? How do we make them useful and economically useful? And at the time it was, OK, we're going to beef up child support. And then we're also going to, you know, obviously women can do whatever, you know, anything a man can. Let's get these single moms working and get them off the child support so we could limit the tax dollars. 1.00

00:14:32.720 But at the same time, there was a woman named Marilyn Ray Smith, and I think she was out of Delaware. She was a director of a child support agency. She was working closely with Congress and she went to speak with them a few times. And her whole thing was, was that, hey, we're having trouble enforcing child support against these guys. And she believed that the child support system should be as strong as the IRS tax system.

00:14:55.740 so she went in there and she's like we want child support to be beefed up we want child support to

00:15:00.060 be given teeth and power as much as the irs you know everybody knows the irs is not who you mess

00:15:05.580 with you know so a big part of this welfare reform bill in the mid 90s perora was also child support

00:15:12.460 reform and that's when child support really got its teeth and that's around the same time genetic

00:15:16.620 testing started coming in so you had huge changes to this space legally have you ever heard of like

00:15:21.820 gynocentrism.com you ever been on that site i think i've heard of the site i've heard of

00:15:26.140 gynocentrism i don't know if i've been to the website personally but yeah go on this really

00:15:31.500 smart guy's name is peter wright and he's like a historian and he studies gynocentrism he was

00:15:37.260 telling me that the courts have been stacked against men from way before the 1900s like this

00:15:42.780 isn't new because society will always have a more gynocentric leaning and there's like writings from

00:15:47.900 the 1800s of a guy being in i don't know if it was family court back then or whatever it was

00:15:53.580 but he was saying like the girl was an opera singer and he was mad because he still had to

00:15:57.660 take care of her and so it was really it was rare but i've heard it was actually not as different as

00:16:04.940 they everyone says it was so different back then and uh you know i i guess that's a great question

00:16:10.220 that people are people i don't know i i know who peter wright is only from twitter i actually

00:16:14.540 really like his his twitter posts and i see that uh really smart guy that he follows you yeah he's

00:16:19.660 very smart guy i i like the stuff he posts because he'll go and dig up stuff from a long time ago and

00:16:24.700 it and it really shows the grounding of all this stuff and i you know i if i remember correctly i

00:16:29.500 think i i think he's he kind of goes deep into chivalry's impact and romantic love's impact on

00:16:35.580 on the culture we have uh very specifically and you know i think there's a lot of merit to what

00:16:39.740 he has to say but when i look at the legal landscape you know and i think he also talks

00:16:43.740 about coventry laws and all these kinds of things a husband's always responsible for a woman even 0.94

00:16:47.820 in her business dealings or whatever debts yeah all these kinds of things but you know we had at

00:16:53.180 fault divorce and vastly different divorce laws going all the way up until 69 1969 when that 0.95

00:16:59.340 started to be changed in the us at least and it's true i think it was always that way but men had

00:17:04.540 more to gain from the deal than they do now you know right now it's more so you know just all of

00:17:09.820 the financial responsibility with not a lot of the authority, basically none of the authority.

00:17:15.140 And so, you know, he's right to go go back that far and and focus on that. But but at the same

00:17:22.060 time, the laws were nowhere near as it's worse. I don't want to use the word oppressive, but you

00:17:27.440 know, to what they are now, you know what I mean? So but basically, this girl came in and wanted it 0.96

00:17:32.880 to be as strong as the IRS system. And so that Marilyn Ray Smith. And that was when because I

00:17:38.460 think you can i have to look through my notes but i know you can lose they can take the money

00:17:43.340 straight from your bank account i'm fairly sure yeah that's called the bank levy we had a whole

00:17:47.900 team over here that focused on bank levies at the agency i worked at i'll basically tell you you

00:17:53.260 know so and this was done in perora so she was you know lobbying congress all this stuff when the 0.95

00:17:58.700 final bill came out it expanded um child support's reach so you can do a lot of things i mean first

00:18:05.500 of all they created a national directory of new hires so that means you know a guy would be working

00:18:10.140 here they'd send a wage assignment then he jumps dates now he's somewhere else we don't know when

00:18:14.540 he if he's working somewhere else we don't know what to do we don't know how to get the money

00:18:17.820 they would just leave so what they did is they created a national directory of new hires and

00:18:21.100 every employer in the nation has to report as soon as they they hire somebody and it gets into this

00:18:25.980 database me over at child support if i see a case that owes money and i don't have to look for this

00:18:31.660 The system is going to blip this in. I'm going to get a task and it's going to say, you know, there's a new employment record. I'm going to look at that. I'm going to see this guy just started employment at this company. I'm going to call that company and I'm going to say, hey, I have a wage assignment. Start docking this guy's wages. And we also get the bank account information that the banks basically report to us. Also, they're required by law. It was the 1996 Perora Act that required financial institutions to provide information to us.

00:18:56.580 So if we see that, what we do is if we have an arrears amount, we will send them a levy, you know, notice, and they will take the money from the account, basically. And it got the power of the child support system got so big that it's like, if you pop up anywhere on the grid, you know, we're going to see you. And a lot of people don't really understand how much access to data the child support system really has, you know, locating parents was a big thing, you know, and that's one of the things that Congress took into account.

00:19:23.180 So it's like they created a federal parent locator service. This is something a child support officer would reference and they would whatever information they have on someone, they'll give it to us. I could take just somebody's phone number. You know, if the woman had a, you know, maybe a one night stand with the guy or something like that, she has his phone number. She doesn't know the guy's name. I can take that phone number and work backwards to get the guy's name, get his social security number, find out his addresses.

00:19:46.500 And when I plug the social security number in, the whole system starts ramping up and I get all of this income information from, you know, however many years it's in there for past addresses, relatives, all these kinds of things, any licenses that they might have.

00:20:00.320 And, you know, you can see all this stuff and you can use it, you know, as leverage to get these payments in there.

00:20:05.600 Let me see. I can give you a list of stuff.

00:20:07.760 So we have access to state and local tax and revenue records.

00:20:11.040 We can see public utilities and television companies.

00:20:14.440 that's since changed to internet service providers so they have to provide information to us if we

00:20:18.600 ask them to we can see uh what financial institutions that are doing business in the

00:20:23.000 state if you got an account with them any occupational and professional licenses so that's

00:20:27.000 a big one um if someone's not paying child support like we'll go after their bar license we'll go

00:20:31.320 after their general contractor's license we'll go after their fishing license their driver's license

00:20:35.720 and we'll suspend all that can't even fish a man i know that one always kind of made me laugh i was

00:20:40.440 was like a fishing license all right you know he's like let me just go off to the woods so i

00:20:47.460 don't have to deal with any of these people yeah i mean yeah the the tentacles of the state are

00:20:53.420 are very powerful and they they go everywhere so you know big data was a thing here so once all

00:20:59.860 this stuff happened in the 90s then you know child support took off basically because now you had

00:21:05.260 genetic tests so you didn't have to go through these lengthy paternity trials where you needed

00:21:09.520 people to come out and be like, yeah, I saw them at the Christmas party. They were together. He

00:21:13.840 bought the kid a gift on the birthday. Here's a birthday card that he did. It was just like,

00:21:18.220 here's the genetic test, simple, fast, easy. You're the dad. Let's start charging. Now that's

00:21:23.020 one thing, but the real problems come in when guys that aren't the biological dad get charged

00:21:28.240 basically. And a lot of that has to do with the interplay between this new radical revolution of

00:21:36.240 genetic testing in the mid 90s and all the case law and legal framework that we have for what

00:21:41.020 constitutes paternity prior, which mostly has to do with a functional relationship. And what the

00:21:46.200 state is most concerned about is, you know, you'll see this thing about like the best interest of

00:21:52.060 the child. And it used, you know, prior to like at fault, when it was at fault divorce, they're

00:21:58.380 looking for who committed faults in the breach of the marriage contract and whoever the injured

00:22:01.980 party was that could be the wife that could be the husband the way the court was going to determine 1.00

00:22:06.720 who gets what and how this how this ends more more would be given to the injured party see so

00:22:12.020 after you got no fault a lot of these laws and stuff like that they look at it as what's in the

00:22:16.700 best interest of the child you know what i mean and if you've been holding out to be the dad like

00:22:21.280 let's say you're married you did everything right a presumption of paternity is there because that's

00:22:25.240 how we established paternity before your wife issues of child the state sees you as the father

00:22:29.580 The marriage ends, let's say the kid's five now, the marriage ended after seven years or something.

00:22:35.300 There's pretty much nothing you can do to undo that.

00:22:37.540 I mean, you're on the hook. 0.83

00:22:38.660 If you find out she's like, screw you, the divorce is contentious, I cheated on you with my old high school boyfriend, I never loved you, all the great stuff. 0.99

00:22:45.320 You take a private genetic test and you're like, this isn't my kid. 0.99

00:22:48.120 You want to undo that, you're not going to be able to.

00:22:50.660 If you look at California Family Code, it specifically limits it to an inaction needing to be filed and served by the time the child's age two.

00:22:58.580 So if the kids, you know, five at this time. Wait, wait. So if he doesn't get the paternity test before age two, he's on child support for life.

00:23:05.420 Yeah. So the kid's emancipated. So if he does not file and serve her for a to contest paternity prior to the kid's second birthday, this is California specifically.

00:23:14.860 Then then, yeah, that's that's that's the case. And that's the problem with the married guys, you know, and then you have the unmarried guys, which is a different thing.

00:23:21.680 But, you know, these these trad cons and people like that are like, get married, get married, get married.

00:23:25.920 but that's what comes in with that you know wait so okay so they they divorce at seven and he goes

00:23:32.760 he he can't claim the kid is not his now or like the kid's seven so if he was married and that

00:23:38.660 child was was um born within the marriage there's a presumption of paternity there it's a very

00:23:43.180 specific legal term but it means you're legally you're legally the father right and no no he can't

00:23:48.720 that's very specifically in the code for california and the states do vary right but for the most part

00:23:54.400 you know, there's a federal act called the Uniform Parentage Act. And, you know, its suggestions are

00:24:00.000 basically two years after the establishment of paternity. California is a little different

00:24:03.860 because it says age two specifically for marriage. And it does vary from state to state. But the

00:24:09.040 most important thing is about the relationship with the child. So even, you know, even if you

00:24:12.560 weren't exactly established, you can challenge it. It'll go to court. Like, let's say it's before

00:24:17.080 the age of two, right? You find out that's not the case. It doesn't mean you can automatically

00:24:21.300 undue paternity, it means you just have the right to challenge that. So it goes to court and let's

00:24:26.240 say, okay, the genetic test comes back. You guys are all sitting there and you're not biologically

00:24:31.480 the father. The court is still going to look at what does life look at for this child? So

00:24:36.020 who is the father? Oh, because it's the best interest of the child.

00:24:39.340 It's going to be the best. So it doesn't mean, oh, because I've heard that. I've heard that

00:24:43.740 with, um, they'll punish the guys for being traditional too, because if they, if they're

00:24:48.480 with the kid less then they don't get cut right they don't get custody because yes if you guys

00:24:54.520 like working to provide for the family then he doesn't get custody because technically the mom 0.99

00:24:59.500 was with the kid more but that's like what trad cons will tell you to do you know that's what yeah

00:25:04.820 well custody if you read about the history of custody it's largely based off of uh based off

00:25:09.640 of functional uh parentage basically so you know genetic testing caused caused a problem for custody

00:25:14.980 also because when genetic testing became a thing you started getting guys you you would maybe get

00:25:19.860 the affair partner of some woman who's in another who's in her marriage and this child comes out it's

00:25:25.700 really the affair partner so the affair partner says hey i want a custody of my child it's mine

00:25:29.960 biologically and then they would then sue to try to get that and this created a new phenomena so

00:25:35.200 it really needed to be spelled out like what's more important as far as custody goes is it

00:25:39.120 functional parentage or is it biological parentage and as it stands now biological parentage takes a

00:25:44.160 backseat and is only really important for who do we charge child support to all right where custody

00:25:48.560 has more to do with functional parentage there's an interesting case also i mean where it went to

00:25:54.220 the supreme court i think it was carol d the child's name was victoria d i can't remember i

00:25:59.340 can't remember the other guy's name but this was in the 80s and i think it was out of california

00:26:04.200 and this one was really wiry because usually the court can be like okay who really has the the

00:26:08.960 relationship with the child who does the child know his dad that that's who we give custody to

00:26:12.200 but what happened in this case is that the mom was with was with the husband they lived together

00:26:15.960 for a couple years then they had a split up or whatever they never i don't think they got formally

00:26:20.200 divorced or not but the dad went to new york for a bit mom and the affair partner were living

00:26:24.920 together so the child was also living around the affair partner for a couple years then mom 1.00

00:26:29.000 broke it off with the affair partner and got back with the husband and they're like okay we're just

00:26:33.640 gonna have our happy family live and married even though this kid's not biologically you know of the

00:26:37.800 of the of the husbands and um what happened is the affair partner was suing for custody because now

00:26:43.320 he has you know he wants to see his child as an emotional relationship and it went back and forth

00:26:47.320 and went back and forth all through the you know appeals process all the way up to the supreme

00:26:51.640 court and it was i believe justice antonin scalia at the time i read his his readings on this but

00:26:57.560 but very specifically they voted there to to uphold the um the rights of the husband in this case

00:27:04.040 because they wanted to protect marriage and it's just like you know in this case where it's very

00:27:08.040 close where both of these guys have a 50 50 kind of like they've had parenting time with this kid

00:27:12.280 we're gonna uphold marriage here instead of you know the the sexual immorality part of it that 0.98

00:27:17.080 was back then but you know these laws are are ever evolving and uh california for instance you can

00:27:22.520 have multiple parents of a child i don't know if you know you knew that like you can have three

00:27:26.280 legal parents of a kid over here and that's that's been relatively new um before i left it that that

00:27:33.160 was kind of becoming a thing 2024 they just updated that a bit to to adjust some of the family codes

00:27:39.960 so if you go in there you can see judges now have the power to decide custody between multiple

00:27:43.960 parents and uh same thing for the the child support calculator you can see the language in

00:27:48.280 there but that's all kind of the groundwork for if polyamory really becomes a thing then you know

00:27:52.920 the courts can go in there and be like hey this is how we're splitting it up you have custody you get

00:27:57.080 custody you don't it seems like it's going that way i mean yeah you know not that i'm happy about

00:28:04.000 it i just i'm just like looking at what's we're kind of in soft polyamory now when you think

00:28:08.720 about it it's kind of de facto but but yeah not not over like no people probably don't want to

00:28:13.780 admit that so much you know there might situationships almost the term almost kind of begs

00:28:18.800 to say it's it's polyamory which is one thing but um the laws are are changing to accommodate that

00:28:24.920 You know what I mean? So it's like, you know, you have all this law going up till now. And it's it's yet to be seen. The multi parent cases we have now aren't aren't really that they're relatively rare. And they have more to do with things like technicalities like I can give you a case construct. There was a case and I mean, you know, this happened where there was two guys and the guys were like in and out of prison. But what was funny, it was like they kept missing each other. So like one guy would be in prison and the other guy wouldn't be he'd be living with mom like one of these two guys was the dad and then that guy would go to prison and the other guy would get out and he'd be living with mom.

00:28:54.920 mom wow she sounds like a great gal yeah well and it I mean you know that's the kind of stuff you

00:29:02.040 I mean you got two prison guys and you got you know it's all kind of a but what ended up happening

00:29:06.100 is that somehow as a fluke the child support agency ended up getting judgments about against

00:29:10.460 both of these guys and that wasn't supposed to happen it should have only been one but that case

00:29:14.860 went to court one person was the father the other guy wasn't and eventually what happened was is

00:29:20.140 they even had to bring the kid in for this one they usually don't have to do that but the the 0.86

00:29:23.820 the commissioner had to take this kid into the back chambers and you know the kid asked the kid

00:29:27.560 about the relationship with the parents you know and and both of these guys and you know the kid

00:29:31.800 was like yeah this one's uncle whoever and this one's dad and you know whatever so they just made

00:29:36.220 both of those dads legal parents and have to both pay child support so you have three legal parents

00:29:40.780 you can also here's one for the passport bros there there is an update coming down the pipeline

00:29:45.940 to the to those laws and it's specifically for like the k1 k2 visas where you bring over a fiance 0.56

00:29:51.560 say or a spouse basically and usually like let's say you have a woman in the philippines and she

00:29:56.880 has a kid there from a prior marriage maybe two kids whatever some guy you know goes out there

00:30:01.480 meets her whatever he wants to bring her back to the united states and he brings her over and what

00:30:06.920 happens is is you know okay she wants to bring her kid over so he sponsors the kid too prior to that 1.00

00:30:12.160 if those two get divorced or split up and she goes on welfare with the kid you know who do you go

00:30:16.900 after? Can you go after this, whoever the bio data is in the Philippines? No, not really. So they go

00:30:21.780 after the sponsor. They're going to be going after the sponsor. This is going to be the new update in

00:30:25.580 the law. And if you, so then you will, in order to get child support from somebody, you have to be

00:30:31.440 a legal parent to those kids. So that's how you'll get three parents that way. But for the most part,

00:30:36.860 these kinds of cases are, it's kind of as an example of how these laws kind of evolve. And

00:30:41.960 then as we get into it later on to like where polyamory maybe becomes more popular if that

00:30:46.420 happens. They can look back at these case laws and be like, okay, there's precedent for this.

00:30:50.020 You can't have multiple parents with custody. You can't have multiple parents paying child

00:30:53.120 support if it's in the child's best interest. So why don't they just go to biological? Wouldn't

00:30:57.220 that make it more simple? Well, you know, again, this goes back to not having, what was the norms

00:31:02.520 of, of how the legal, the laws operated back then by biology was, you know, we didn't have

00:31:08.800 the genetic testing, right? So we, we had to create our legal systems for, you know, the thousands of

00:31:13.780 years that we've been around based off of the the functional parentage but you know what you can't

00:31:19.120 just because there's a lot of guys that are like you know if it's if I'm biologically the dad I

00:31:23.220 should be given 50 50 custody and you know I would hear that at the child support office you know I

00:31:28.600 had guys come in that that we got a judgment against from child support and they're paying

00:31:32.220 now and I'm like hey you know okay there's a five-year-old out here you're you're the dad you

00:31:36.180 owe us you know give us 800 a month this is how you can pay blah blah blah they'd be like how are

00:31:39.840 guys taking money from me uh and i can't even see my kids she won't let me see my kid and child 1.00

00:31:44.560 support's answer to that was hey there's nothing we can do about it because you want to go across 0.98

00:31:48.640 the street to private family law and you know you might want to look at the self-help center over

00:31:52.480 there and see if you can figure it out see that's private family law because versus the public so

00:31:57.120 they're separate because they they do a judgment there and then you guys calculate it basically

00:32:02.080 well no we do our own judgments just for child support so we can do that but we can only do it

00:32:07.760 in a limited scope of just child support or health insurance for the just the financial stuff right

00:32:11.840 just the providing and the provisioning for the kids when it comes to custody custody never became

00:32:16.240 part of of public family law because you got to remember our office is about recouping these

00:32:20.480 welfare dollars that's what we're concerned with our performance measures are concerned with how

00:32:24.720 many kids can we establish paternity for how much money can we come to recoup for the welfare system

00:32:29.920 and when it comes to paternity it's like do we don't have the biggest incentive to care about

00:32:34.080 who the actual biological father is right we need a father for the kid now if we don't know of course

00:32:39.920 we're going to go through the rigmarole of who the dad is but that has to do more with who mom

00:32:43.920 tells us we have cases where mom tries to protect the real dad we had a case where um this mom gave

00:32:50.320 us a man's information that she got from somewhere i mean she had social security number she had

00:32:54.880 everything so we're like okay great that's who she's saying she's signing the paperwork saying

00:32:58.640 i'm saying this is the dad of this child because she was on welfare and we started a case against

00:33:03.920 this guy and we we sued him we we put him through the whole rigmarole and he's just like why are you

00:33:08.480 guys suing me i never met this woman in my life i don't know who this is had a certain part of it

00:33:12.560 he was like listen i'm gay i've never had sexual intercourse the woman in my life there's no way 0.99

00:33:17.040 i'm the father and uh the genetic test came back he wasn't the dad and finally like when we had to

00:33:25.040 put some pressure on the mom the mom came clean and she was just like okay you know the dad the

00:33:29.760 real dad actually lives with me and uh i i gave you guys this fake identity to try to protect the

00:33:36.080 dad so there's all kinds of weird but can a woman couldn't she just not put him on child support 1.00

00:33:41.200 if she is receiving welfare funds for the child it's not her choice whether or not child support

00:33:45.760 takes action so there's a thing called from the state she has to put someone on child support

00:33:51.840 when you sign up for welfare one of the things is it's a specific term called assignment of

00:33:56.480 support rights so when you sign up for welfare you are assigning your support rights to the county

00:34:01.280 and now it becomes the county's right to go after to the child support to to reimburse the the

00:34:05.600 federal you know the treasury basically it becomes the state's concern at that point now public

00:34:10.240 family law has intruded into a private family deal so you can see how all those pieces kind

00:34:15.200 of interplay there if she gets off of welfare let's say she's on welfare yeah take away welfare 1.00

00:34:20.640 from women good luck yeah okay if it happens then miracles happen i guess sorry take away

00:34:30.680 free things from women never well you know yeah i mean that that's going to be a challenge 1.00

00:34:37.040 especially as you know i i kind of think about that too and um it seems like we're going more

00:34:42.760 towards a uh i don't want to say like i guess socialist would be the word but but style of

00:34:47.500 governance and programs there as we move further and further away from what it was. But going back,

00:34:52.660 if she gets off welfare, the support rights are assigned back to the mom. So she can say, hey, 1.00

00:34:58.040 close the case down against dad. I don't want to have a case open against them. It's actually

00:35:02.560 causing a problem to our relationship. And I'd rather you guys close that down. And then dad

00:35:07.560 would only be responsible to pay back the county what he owes. And then mom and dad can continue

00:35:11.860 to take care of it. And that kind of brings in a whole other subject. There's actually a lot of

00:35:17.480 literature and studies and papers written on this like i guess one thing i want to say is that there

00:35:22.120 are a lot of smart academic minds i mean we got princeton and columbia and all these people

00:35:26.920 looking at this stuff and they're trying to figure out what's best here you know and a lot of the

00:35:31.000 programs that we have now are created from you know scholars looking at this working with politicians

00:35:37.320 trying to solve the problems that they had back then but we got new problems now you know things

00:35:42.200 have changed traditionalism's gone all these kinds of things and for a long time we didn't have data

00:35:47.880 on on unmarried fathers and what the relationship between them and their children look like so after

00:35:52.680 the 96 you know beefing up of child support that was acknowledged that we didn't have that i mean

00:35:57.160 we knew that you know relation outcomes for children are better when they're in a intact

00:36:02.200 family you know with both parents we knew that domestic violence and things are are higher and

00:36:07.080 and outside unmarried parents what we didn't have for that data was if between bio dad or just a

00:36:12.920 social father as they called it someone who's not the kid's dad but so they undertook a gigantic

00:36:18.640 study called the fragile families study basically it's been since renamed in 2023 i don't think the

00:36:24.160 name was politically correct i think it's now called the future well-being of families study

00:36:28.840 or something like that but fragile families is you know if you look that up you'll find it and

00:36:33.280 basically what they did is they they took about like about 4200 kids born in hospitals in big

00:36:39.120 cities and they've been following these kids throughout their entire life from age one to age

00:36:44.380 two to age five to age ten uh the kids just turned 22 i think last year so they're not kids anymore

00:36:50.320 but the whole time they're looking at that and they're saying okay when is dad involved in the

00:36:54.560 life okay does dad pay mom for this is there domestic violence they're going through and

00:36:58.740 they're interviewing the parents of these children and all these kinds of things and what they found

00:37:02.980 out uh there's a paper that's that's pretty interesting here i actually have it up it's

00:37:07.460 called questioning child support enforcement policy for poor families and that's from leslie

00:37:11.300 joan harris she's she's a pretty big name in this so it's like sarah mclanahan erwin garfinkel aaron

00:37:16.580 garfinkel and sarah mclanahan's uh were the two academics that started this this gigantic study

00:37:22.580 and um what they found is is typically the the father is involved you know in an unmarried uh family

00:37:32.980 to help out and want to participate. And what this paper specifically says is it's asking,

00:37:47.120 is the public child support enforcement system that we have, does it actually help or harm poor

00:37:53.060 families? And if you read this paper at the end of it, what you see is that in cases where the

00:37:58.240 child support program is involved, the poor children actually get less money and less

00:38:04.440 involvement from their fathers than if the child support program isn't involved. The mom gets more 0.58

00:38:09.820 informal direct payments. The children have more time with the dads. But when the government gets

00:38:14.980 involved, it actually makes it harder for poor families, which is ironic because this whole

00:38:19.560 thing started because it's supposed to be helping poor. Well, it was to recoup welfare tax dollars,

00:38:23.700 but it's also to be helping poor families. So, you know, you have academic literature that shows

00:38:28.980 these kinds of things. And, you know, it's obviously something we know. The men know it.

00:38:33.300 The grumblings are there on the Internet. They know something is wrong. I think they have trouble

00:38:38.320 putting it into words because, I mean, this is a gigantic rabbit hole when it comes to the laws.

00:38:42.560 I mean, no one person can fully get their mind wrapped around, you know, the intricacies of

00:38:48.020 this entire system. It's like looking at, you know, our legal system is so refined. It's like

00:38:54.020 as sophisticated as the engineering on an iPhone or something. So looking under the hood here and

00:38:58.200 trying to figure out what's going on is pretty tough. It's really confusing. And, you know,

00:39:02.560 there's a lot of people that are like, we need to change the laws. And the answer is absolutely

00:39:05.520 yes, we do. But the question tends to come up, okay, what laws do we change? Then you start

00:39:10.840 looking at them. I say ban child support, but I don't know how easy that would be.

00:39:14.780 well you know i mean again it's tied to the welfare system right i personally believe child

00:39:21.160 support should be curtailed it's too powerful right now i think there should be there should

00:39:25.520 be limits on the amount you know like here's the problem like when it was just poor families

00:39:29.880 dealing with the public laws nobody cared because it wasn't that many of them but as feminism and 0.98

00:39:35.980 you know out of wedlock birds have increased and the culture has changed they're able to exploit 0.71

00:39:40.760 these public laws for their own gain. And now it's become a problem to where the public laws

00:39:46.500 were just for the poor. It has now intruded into the middle class. It has now intruded into

00:39:50.260 Tyrese Gibson's house in a Hollywood celebrity. And that's a problem. You know what I mean? So

00:39:55.800 they're able to leverage this against men. And the question is, okay, what do we do about it now?

00:40:02.100 How do we change it? The things that, you know, my personal axe to grind, you know, like, I guess

00:40:06.980 my bigger axe would be paternity laws. That's the kind of stuff. I don't like paternity fraud. I

00:40:11.400 don't like that when I see that. My smaller but also sharp axe to grind is, you know, spousal and

00:40:17.780 child support, I think, need to have caps. That makes sense to the economic area you're living in,

00:40:22.380 you know, because with no-fault divorce, you know, if you as a man are supposed to be the provider

00:40:26.960 and you are successful and you have done a good job of being able to be a great provider, you know,

00:40:31.940 mom can walk away the this is the uh you know i'm not happy meme from coach greg adams and uh she

00:40:37.860 can leave and and the law basically says you are entitled to his lifestyle you can leave for no

00:40:42.660 reason uh if you look at the spousal support court uh if you look at the family law code in california

00:40:47.460 for spousal support uh you know early on in there one of the things the judge is going to take into

00:40:52.020 account what was the lifestyle uh what are the people used to within the marriage and so when

00:40:56.340 it comes to awarding spousal support i mean then whatever lifestyle is theirs is fair game same

00:41:01.540 thing with child support if you look at the codes it basically says and then it makes them a target

00:41:06.180 right yeah it makes them yeah exactly that's my biggest thing with it because you know when you

00:41:10.420 get into a lot of the conversation a lot of it is about a high value man you know kevin samuels made

00:41:15.780 that popular he was talking to women and you know he was talking about high value man there's a lot

00:41:20.100 of self-improvement stuff going on uh you know a lot of the other big podcasts andrew tate you know

00:41:25.460 was was this i just watched a uh i think it was a stream with those two andrew tate and the fresh

00:41:32.260 and fit guys and towards the last half hour of that conversation uh they talk about you know

00:41:36.980 self-improvement and getting to this place myron literally says being average isn't good enough

00:41:41.540 anymore which to me i mean you can stop right there that just means traditionalism is gone

00:41:45.380 because if you can't be average like what was traditionalism ever for if not for the common

00:41:49.460 people right i would like to think so if you if average if you can't be average anymore

00:41:54.020 traditionalism is gone well i don't think myron says that traditionalism is here i think he'd

00:41:58.980 agree with you on that yeah yeah he would absolutely agree with me but if if we can

00:42:03.620 if we agree that being average isn't good enough then then when you look at going back to being

00:42:07.140 traditional and you know not not being a high value man then that's not going to work um andrew

00:42:12.100 tate you know he is kind of emblematic of this entire phenomena you know he he's he has one in

00:42:17.460 the material world like he he beat everybody he's got the bugattis this that everything now even him

00:42:23.780 even Andrew Tate has to jump ship because he needs to go somewhere where the jurisdiction is

00:42:28.800 not as harsh against men in terms of family law and marriages. You know, he's not starting a

00:42:33.180 family in London or in the US. I wonder why. So it's like you can be that you can beat the game.

00:42:38.940 You know what I mean? And those guys still don't want to be having a family here, which to me

00:42:42.960 signals that the problem is the law, because right now people aren't women are incentive to be, 0.97

00:42:47.960 you know, predators in that way. You can be high value. You can attract these women. But 0.98

00:42:52.720 the minute you try to long-term invest into someone, you are now completely vulnerable to

00:42:57.420 the system. So, you know, people like Myron, I mean, I have his book right here, Why Women Deserve 0.99

00:43:02.180 Less, or Andrew Tate, you know, they will sell the self-improvement mantra as the long-term

00:43:09.860 answer, but it's not. It's good in maximizing short-term options. But the minute you decide

00:43:14.280 to fully invest in one of these, you are now subject to what these laws are going to do to you.

00:43:19.240 And there's no way to avoid it if you have a kid. That's that.

00:43:21.480 there's no way yeah because i i talked to um i don't know if you know lead attorney have you

00:43:26.420 seen his stuff oh yeah i know i know i spoke to him about this and he told me he didn't fear

00:43:31.440 marriage he said look i've been married you can get a you can get a prenup that's pretty good you

00:43:36.200 can get a divorce whatever what i fear is children because when you have kids in this country these

00:43:41.840 kids are not yours he's like i would get married again tomorrow i could i i'll do marriage but he

00:43:47.860 he's told me that there's just no way unless you do surrogacy to have a child and it really

00:43:53.060 belonged to you as I cannot stand surrogacy I'm not saying he's wrong that's another thing that

00:43:57.420 it's just something that personally irks me it's super weird yeah no I think it's weird too but

00:44:01.560 you know it's weird it's going viral it's going viral that a guy got a surrogacy thing like but

00:44:07.080 it's interesting someone in Mexico or Brazil or something but what's interesting to me is there

00:44:10.920 was such an outcry about it from the trad con but women have been doing the same thing for like 1.00

00:44:16.280 how long 30 50 i don't know go on you can go on reddit right now and look up a subreddit called

00:44:22.600 single mothers by choice it is the craziest thing it's just to me it's so selfish but a guy gets

00:44:28.540 but a guy gets one kid and everyone's freaking out everyone's mad i i agree with you it's weird

00:44:34.440 you know but i'm like i mean women have been doing it for forever you know i will rather have the dad 1.00

00:44:41.180 in that case because you know i'm pretty sure the kid's going to have a better outcome in that way

00:44:46.260 i mean it's funny because you can see okay who's the better parent which kids are going to get the

00:44:49.620 better outcome is it being raised by a single mom or a single father ideally it should be too 0.52

00:44:53.620 dad you already know so easy yeah so like and that's the thing it's to me it's just it's just

00:44:59.140 cruel if um and i can tell you some funny cases that kind of like we had a case with two lesbians 0.75

00:45:04.100 you know and this kind of goes into the multi-parent thing but they got a sperm donor and they didn't

00:45:10.260 didn't do it through the-

Pearl - March 01, 2024

The TRUTH behind Child Support Corruption？｜ THE SITDOWN With @thisisshah

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript

Pearl - March 01, 2024

The TRUTH behind Child Support Corruption？ ｜ THE SITDOWN With @thisisshah

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript

The TRUTH behind Child Support Corruption？｜ THE SITDOWN With @thisisshah