Letter: Use of the term ‘deadbeat parent’ damaging to kids

Tuesday, May 18, 1999 | 3:03 a.m.

The facts are that children do need the support of both parents after a divorce and that doesn't necessarily mean money. Statistics prove that those parents who are given the opportunity to share parenting are more likely to support a child in many ways, including financially.

In some cases, money paid to an ex-spouse intended for the children never benefits the child. Sometimes child support payments are used to pay one's attorney's fees and is actually an ongoing legal defense fund for the custodial parent. The demand for money and the result of alienation of children from a parent is often a reality. These issues are rarely addressed in court or easily proven.

The painful truth is that once a household is split, bills nearly double for each spouse. To place the burden on one parent to perform like a money-making machine is ridiculous and doesn't work too well. A better solution would be to first offer joint parenting, and for the parents to agree to live in close proximity to each other to accommodate such a plan. If a parent wishes to move away and have little to do with the children, then they should pay for such a decision.

To call a parent a "deadbeat" is damaging. How do you think a child would feel seeing a wanted poster of their parent in the post office? Not good, that's how. Children are part of each parent, like it or not. When one parent is degraded, a child's self-esteem will be assaulted as they are well aware that they are a creation of both mom and dad.

AL DI CICCO, Coalition for Family Court Reform

archive