In Indiana, there is a bill being proposed that would collect winnings won in casinos by parents who are behind in child support payments and handing them over to the kids.
It’s getting a lot of support from Department of Child Services, Senator Schnieder and the Governor, but casinos are not on board with the idea:
The Casino Association of Indiana worries the legislation would cause a two-minute delay on casino floors while names of winners are checked against an electronic list of people owing child support.
They also site these reasons that would further complicate things:
….searching an outside database of people who owe child support could be problematic since not all casino floors have Internet access.
Also, more than half of casino gamblers are from out of state, so the chances of catching deadbeat parents are relatively small, he said. Smith also argued that child support collections are the government’s responsibility, not the role of private business.
First of all, why don’t all casino floors have internet access? I see the point being made about most gamblers are from out of state. However, Colorado casinos already have something similar in place and they don’t seem to have a problem enforcing it, even if it is a bit of a headache and not without complaint from the casinos themselves.
Second, let’s look at a few stats: In Indiana a little over half of payments are collected.
More than 165,000 noncustodial parents each owe more $2,000 in back child support, which adds up to more than $2 billion in delinquencies, according to the state Department of Child Services
And, really, what the hell are you doing gambling in a casino if you can’t pay your child support and/or are considerably behind?
I have my doubts that this proposed bill will actually be put into place, despite being backed by the Department of Child Services and various statesmen. Indiana isn’t the most ‘family friendly’/'family forward’ state.
When Roman Polanski dies, he will not be known for his brilliant films like Rosemary’s Baby or The Pianist.
He will be known as a sexual predator who used his riches and fame to escape the hand of the law.
Yes. It is a shame that such a brilliant talent will go down like that.
A bigger shame is that he’s gotten away with it for so long.
As a survivor of sexual crimes, it makes me ill to see that he’s never fully acknowledged his crime or served the penalty for victimizing a 13-year-old girl.
As a mother of a 5-year-old girl, it makes me sick think that we have not eliminated people like this from society. I constantly worry about someone taking her innocence as mine was.
As a citizen of the world, it makes me nauseous that France and Poland are asking the United States to turn a blind eye to this man’s crimes because they occurred more than 35 years ago.
While time gives us perspective on life, it may not heal all wounds, especially these kinds of wounds.
The irony of the situation does not escape me. Polanski’s mother died in a concentration camp. Would the crimes against his family been more forgivable if they had been at the hand of a brilliant German artist? Are the crimes of the Holocaust any less heinous because they occurred more than 75 years ago? How can he and those that defend him not see this? Of, if they do see it, ignore it and claim that hampering Polanski’s artistic potential is more important than justice for his victim?
Does it matter that Polanski used drugs and alcohol to coerce his victim instead of a gun or a knife?
The only thing that’s more disgusting than people defending Polanski’s actions is the energy that’s been expended on this particular case. How many other children are voiceless victims of sexual predators?
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics:
That should make you sick.
If you’re a parent, think of your child’s class. There are probably 30 or so kids in that room. By the time they finish high school, how many of them will have their innocence stolen by someone they trusted.
We have a choice here. We can keep the spotlight on Roman Polanski and hold him accountable, or we can focus our energies on protecting out kids from people like him. As much as I’d love to see him pay his price,
I have to choose prevention over punishment. One more victim is one too many.
At just over 6 months into his presidency, Obama might be showing some weaknesses. His administration may be wondering if he’s not as fail-proof as the media and his former supporters have bragged about in the recent past. Recently, Ohio marked the first state that went for Obama in his presidential candidacy as turning. Ohio’s majority is now opposed to Obama, when their state went for him and elected him only 8 months ago. So, what has changed?
Only a few months ago Dems were boasting and touting that Republicans were done for and any ambitions the party had of regaining power, either in the senate, house or executive branch would be thwarted by new legislation which had to passed immediately, before anybody had the chance to read or analyze it’s consequence. It may have been our celebrity culture that elected our new president and perhaps, celebrity expectations that Americans had sunk their future into. Americans, by all defensive measures just like(d) Obama and that was good enough to get him elected and now they seem confused and surprised that what he promised on the campaign trail — he’s trying to deliver on. What did American’s think was going to happen? Did they think he was only paying political lip service? Well, I have to admit, I did. While I might not be a supporter, I thought, as many Americans did, that he was going to lead much more to the center and that he was only pandering to the left. (Oops!) continue reading…
The Interwebs have been aflutter over Jon and Kate Gosselin. Who did what to whom? How much of a role did the cameras play in the disintegration of their relationship? Did their greed compromise their judgment as parents and as life partners? Who cheated on whom? It’s easy to point fingers, especially since they’ve chosen to live their lives so publicly.
I have no great sympathy for their claims that the media should back off, respecting their privacy as a family. When you open your life as they have (and as I have on my blog), you have to take the good with the bad. There will be those that love you no matter what. There will be people who will celebrate every stumble and heartbreak you experience. Others will question everything you do. It’s part and parcel of the deal.
In the end, though, what we have is a couple who is ending their relationship in a very public way. Regardless of my opinions about their relationship and parenting choices, I can’t help but watch their faces and see so much that is familiar.
I saw it months ago, the lack of physical contact, the emotional detachment, the harsh words that were only half-joking. They got further and further from each other. Soon, that interview couch could not have been long enough.
Eyes were swollen. Walls were up. The end was near. continue reading…
The Chicago City Council approved the ban on a 48-0 vote and a spokeswoman for Mayor Richard M. Daley said he intends to sign it. The ban is slated to take effect Jan. 31, 2010.
BPA, or Bispheol A, is a chemical used to make plastics. Exposure to it is known to mimic hormones and cause a host of chemical disruptions as well as reproductive harm in the body. It has been in the news frequently in the last year or so, concerning manufacturing of water and baby bottles; it’s use in the production of PVC, flame retardants and the coatings of the insides of food and beverage cans, among other things.
Other places to ban BPA: Suffolk County in New York, Minnesota and the entire country of Canada.
Despite the obvious, proven effects BPA has on humans, the FDA and the chemicals industry claim products with the chemical are safe.
Chicago’s ordinance requires retailers to post notices declaring that products they sell do not contain BPA. Violators could be fined up to $100 or more per offense and could lose their licenses.
All original content © 2002 - 2013 Imperfect Parent®. Imperfect Parent and Mominatrix are registered trademarks.
The views, opinions and information expressed in articles and blog posts published on imperfectparent.com and all subdomains are those of the authors alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of The Imperfect Parent or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of any entity of, or affiliated with, Imperfect Parent. The Imperfect Parent is designed for entertainment purposes only and is not meant to be a substitute for medical, health, legal, or financial advice from a professional.
Reproduction of material from any of Imperfect Parent's pages without written permission is strictly prohibited.