Ten Key Findings from Responsible Fatherhood Initiatives (pdf)
by Karin Martinson and Demetra Nightingale
February 2008

excerpts:

Although child support enforcement efforts have increased dramatically in recent years, there is evidence that many low-income fathers cannot afford to meet their child support obligations without impoverishing themselves or their families. Instead, many fathers accumulate child support debts that may lead them to evade the child support system and see less of their children.

They’ve actually known about that for a long time.  It would be nice if their policies reflected their knowledge.

Under the expanded purposes of Title IVA, authorized in the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-193, also known as PRWORA), states have been able to use some of their Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) funds to provide services to nonresident fathers, including employment-related services. PRWORA also authorized grants to states to assist noncustodial parents with access and visitation issues, and it required states, as part of their Child Support Enforcement Program, to have procedures requiring fathers who are not paying child support to participate in work activities, which may include employment and training programs. The Deficit Reduction Act (DRA) of 2005 (P.L. 109-171), which contains a reauthorization of the TANF program, also authorized funding to states and public and nonprofit entities for responsible fatherhood programs.

That is interesting. Several years ago I found a page on the Federal website that stated there was money available to assist noncustodial parents with visitation issues. Since I knew several organizations looking for this type of help, I wrote and asked about it. The government’s response was to delete that page on the website!

They stated the money was being sent through a grant program and each state could decide how to use it. I was still hopeful. I researched the program and found out who had received the money in California. Boy was I disappointed. The money was given to a program that runs supervised visitation centers. Those programs don’t help noncustodial parents. They charge parents for their court-ordered services, and some of the participants are innocent.

I did a bit more research. I learned the agency in California was part of a huge money-making business that runs visitation centers all across the country with that funding. I couldn’t find one penny that was available to help noncustodial parents. Our government had let all noncustodial parents down.

I believe the following is very significant. I often hear from single mothers who are outraged that they aren’t getting more, or any child support. When asked about their own situation it sometimes becomes clear that these mothers are low-income or don’t have a lot of work experience. I often wondered if they expected more from the fathers of their children than they expect of themselves. It looks like I was on the right path.

Low-Income Fathers and Mothers Face Similar and Significant Barriers

While program administrators of these early fatherhood initiatives expected the population of nonresident parents to be disadvantaged, the extent and severity of barriers was generally greater than anticipated. Program administrators of the responsible fatherhood initiatives uniformly found that poorly educated minorities with limited job opportunities make up a disproportionate share of low-income, nonresident fathers. Although most low-income noncustodial fathers have some work experience, many of them work intermittently at low wages and have low education and skill levels that limit their job prospects.

Overall, nonresident fathers and custodial mothers look very similar in terms of race, low education levels, and work history. In a national representative survey of poor noncustodial fathers who do not pay child support, over 40 percent had high school diplomas and only 30 percent had worked in the past three years. These rates were nearly identical to those of poor custodial mothers. Like their female counterparts, noncustodial fathers had many other employment barriers, including health issues, substance abuse, housing instability, lack of transportation, and mental health problems.

The following is something I’ve known since the day I started working with fathers.

Being a Good Father Is Important to Nonresident Fathers

Program activities focused on improving fathers’ relationships with their children were highly valued by participants and served as an important incentive to encourage participation. Several evaluations (including those for PFS, PFF, RFP, and Young Unwed Fathers Project) reported that many fathers expressed a desire to be more involved in their children’s lives and appreciated the services that addressed parenting and child related issues. Peer support sessions or other support groups that provided information on their rights and obligations as nonresident fathers, encouraged positive parenting behavior, and allowed sharing of concerns and points of confusion consistently received high marks from participants, as noted in the PFS, PFF, and Young Unwed Fathers evaluations. Some programs included workshops focused specifically on parenting issues and sponsored father-child events, at least in part because of participant interest in these issues. Experiences in the RFP demonstrations, PFF, and PFS initiatives indicated that participants also valued services and information related to custody and visitation.

I find this next part very important.

Some fathers were unhappy with the amount of access they had to their children and turned toward program staff to formally or informally help them negotiate visitation agreements. Although not common, some programs (particularly in the PFF and RFP demonstrations) found it valuable to provide legal representation or financial assistance with legal costs to address custody and visitation as well as other issues.

Mothers often receive free legal aid. Fathers rarely do. Many fathers are court-ordered to pay for both attorneys. One of these fathers is Bill Sharp. He told me he’s had to spend his kids’ college money on his children’s mothers’ frivolous filings.

Sharp recently told me, “She went to court pleading indigence as a rationale for a child support increase … and three weeks after getting the increase went out and bought a two-seater Mazda Miata to replace her Saturn L-series sedan (when she had two teenage children living with her in her house that she still had to transport). If the kids missed the bus then they missed school (and they did); because she couldn’t take them.”