Bobby Ray Rushing Jr dead beat dad refuses to pay child support for his children Badin North Carolina

Aafes, your argument is based on fictional numbers based on unreported cases. Unreported is "estimated" merely for the fact that they are unreported, simply translated that equals to a "guess" and nothing more.

My numbers, although not factual in the state's, or country's conclusions were merely based on the actual numbers on "rippoff reports." I believe I was mistaken however, and the number of dead beat dad's on THIS site is 666 at this time, while the dead beat mom's on THIS site equals 104 if I am not misaken. That of course could mean many things, to include men not reporting on THIS site, or possibly women being more passionate about wanting the other parent around, or to pay support, or both. Take of it what you will but my only conclusion to my previous statement was simply what has been reported on this particular website, not a national statistic, of reported or unreported cases reguarding dead beats of male to female ratio.

What upsets me the most about THIS particular case, is the multiple children, and the multiple wives. Granted the wives (except wife #1 simply because of no history to go off of) are in my own opinion opting for this lifestyle of "get in, get out" from this Mr. Rushing Jr. (simply because a history tells a big story of a person, so the women are not blindsided innocent "victims" here, after the fact.) However, as most men fail to realize from my own perspective the CHILDREN are the ones left without a father, and often without financial support as well.

One thing I did notice in this particular case was the mere mention of "seeing the child." In cases where the mother wishes for their to be an established relationship with the child, I am on the mother's side, simply because it is the proper thing to have a relationship with BOTH parents as these children are NOT TO BLAME.

In my opinion, the time to focus merely on the mother, is when SHE opts for money ONLY instead of also a concern for the well being of the relationship to be in place between father and child. In this case, a daughter, who by the OP's words reflect that she "knows" daddy, yet she has not "seen daddy" in almost a year.

People in my own opinion do not see what kind of devistation that (in and out behavior from the father) leaves on a child's emotional structure, and developement. THAT I BELIEVE SHOULD BE AGAINST THE LAW TO DO TO A CHILD. (moreso or equal to financial obligations)

The Law, tends to be more geared towards the "financial aspect" only, instead of the emotional well being of the child. I say this knowing a law that the "parent" (in the eyes of the law) biological or otherwise who has developed a relationship with the child is responsible for that child, and I say that knowing full well those parents (who should be upheld in society as the one that stuck around to care for the child, although not biologically their own) instead, if they get behind on support payments (after the dissolution of the relationship with spouse, or other party) COULD end up in jail, although they are STILL maintaining that relationship with the child. How is THIS in the best interest of the CHILD?

My belief is the only concern the law indicates is WHO is paying for that child, not who is parenting that child. (except the mother of course, who seems to always be in the background taking heat about HER "intentions" and her "stupidity to bed with" even to include support enforcement officials)

This case, and many others leaves me with the feeling the laws are not properly put in place for this "type" of issue, and therefore in my personal opinion those laws should be completed, understood to their fullest extent, (on a CHILD'S perspective of development) and pursued to be changed for the emotional structure and balance of our children.

Furthermore, the understanding that those very children are our next generation, who I am sorry to say will be the very next individuals who do the EXACT same thing to their own child (statistically) as was allowed upon themselves by these "laws" in place today, which disreguard the child's emotional structure and are limited to financial aspects. (because you can't MAKE or FORCE a father or parent to LOVE, in the eyes of the law. However, you CAN enforce RESPONSABILITY even emotional responsability, but we do not as a society enforce emotional balance for our children left behind by the abandoning parent) Therefore, this will bring our already troubled issues of child support, and "enforcement" to a non existant "enforced issue" with our upcoming generation. (after all what is a law really if it is NOT enforced?)

On the opposite end, it is the responsability of the parent, even be it the ONE parent available, to teach the children in this day and age, to not reproduce this behavior (they unfortunately witness on a daily basis) on a "moral" stance, as the legal repercussions are weak in my opinion.

Good luck to you Lisa, I wish you all the joy in the world with raising your daughter.

Not jumping on anyone, but what I can't understand is why some of these women go with these men that have kids from a a previous female, that they're not supporting, already either the women or the kids and they think it's gonna be any different with them.

Thank you all for responding. It seems I touched quite a few nerves with this one. Let me first thank Laura, Christine and Donette for coming to my defense with your understanding and empowerment!

Now please allow me to address Marc and Cory. I was married to Bobby for 10 years. I married him when I was 20 years old. My biggest mistake was marrying too young. I am far from dumb and certainly not a gold digger. I struggled to help him build a masonry business in our area which he let fail. I was 28 years old when I gave birth to our daugher, a daughter we both wanted. I made the decision to seperate from him when he became physically violent with our daugher as she was approaching the tender age of 18 months. I left to protect my child. It became clear to me that there were other issues with substances that I wanted no part of, so I divorced.

I didn't meet my ex-husband in a bar, it was not a one night stand, there was no contest as to who could "get the loser". We had purchased a home, had a marriage and a family that he decided he didn't want anymore and treated us likewise.
My daughter didn't do anything to anyone and she deserves to have her father's support even if she doesn't receive his love. It is not my daughter's fault that Bobby and I are not married anymore and she is not receiving the benefit of our joint income. It's his fault for his actions that he must own. He is a father and it is his responsibility to help provide for her.

I am not bashing all dead beat dads and I am well aware that there are women just as bad...they are pathetic too. Where's the motherly love and attachment there? But, I am only talking about one deadbeat. The one I am most familiar with, my ex-husband that neglects his own flesh and blood. If he can't/won't support his children, then he should stop having them. I was his first wife. My child is now 10 years old. I don't particularly want his money but my child deserves a college fund.

And one last note, for one night stander's that have got caught with their semen fertilizing an egg...you should wrap it. It is just as much your fault as it is the female's. It takes two do the deed, own your actions and accept the consequences. I realize that there are females out there that will bed a man just to get pregnant and have a paycheck. But it the male's responsibility to protect himself as well. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
Thanks.

Laura,

I don't agree with your assertion that out of 684 "deadbeat parents" only 84 are women. Yes, ther is likely a higher percentage that are reported as "deadbeats" that are men.

I believe this stems from a simple, although unfair practice. In our country, although wrong, men are often paid well above the same women colleague that does the same job. Illegal, but prevalent. Despite the fact the woman is the non custodial parent, many men simply will not seek out financial support, as they feel the amount they would gain monetarily is simply not worth the effort.

Additionally, I believe the situation of unreported "deadbeat" mothers is much like the situation of unreported domestic abuse in which the man is the victim. In domestic abuse cases 40% of the victims are men, only in reported cases. It is estimated there are 835,000 cases of domestic abuse with male victims, unreported annually.

Whether simply the male "ego" and the potential embarrassment to the same, or for other reasons, I believe there is a similar percentage of unreported "deadbeat" mothers.

Visitation laws:

You commented that visitation laws are -"...there for the few men that either 1. Want to use it as a weapon against the mother..."

This coin also has two sides. Many men want to visit their children and be part of their lives. Many custodial mothers use visitation as a weapon to gain further monetary support outside of what is court ordered. Extortion in the form of allowing court ordered visitation.

I don't defend deadbeat parents of either sex. Morally, they should care nothing about money and only focus on the well being of their children. In the same line of thought, many "deadbeat parents" fight paying support because they witness that the custodial parent is utilizing the funds to support a lifestyle they cannot afford.

Marc, Why blame the man? I'll tell you why. Yes they both had this child. Who is there raising the child? Where is the MAN? That is why I blame the "man."

You marc, if I had to guess your age I would guess it to be 21-24. Why? Because it's obvious from your postings that you have many friends who are deadbeat fathers, as I would assume you also are. If not yet, it won't be long. The man is not a man at all that is why I blame the man.

MEN actual MEN support, love, nuture, understand, focus, dedicate their lives to their children. No matter what the situation with the mother is after the children are conceived.

In this situation it is apparent this man jumps fromm wife to wife having children upon children, and no longer acknowledges their existance once the relationship is over with the spouse. That does not make for a good father, or a good husband in my opinion. There is more to life than monetary gain when it comes to raising children. Emotional aspects are overlooked in our society today. There is a financial obligation yes, but there is also an emotional obligation. If a man does not fulfill his financial obligation he is considered a dead beat. It still doesn't take away from the cycle of abandoning children who will grow to also abandon theirs as well. I blame whoever turns their backs on their children, be it a man OR a woman.

Children are to be comforted, protected, and secure. It takes two to have a child and there is a reason for that, it also takes two to raise a child properly. We are not animals we are humans, we should really all of us start behaving like educated responsible adults when it comes to bringing children into the world, and be responsible once that occurs.

I understand that women have left their children as well. I believe there are a lot less women that have abandoned their own children. Well, just look at the dead beat dads 684 I believe are on here while 84 women. So, in comparison, although women also leave, I don't believe it is the "norm" as it is with men.

There are very few men out there, I believe in this world that help raise the kids. While some do not bounce from job to job (those pay child support) but most of the time, I am sorry to say from what I see they do not ever come around for the emotional support and help raise the children that they created. There are no laws set up for that aspect, and give me a break about visitation laws. They are "optional" to say the least. Those are there for the few men that either 1. Want to use it as a weapon against the mother. or 2. The few who actually have grown to love their children and want to actually see them.

All I say is protect your girls, and raise your sons to not continue the vicious cycle that has begun throughout our generations at this point. There is no obligation strong enough to make having a child what it should be which is, HAVING A CHILD.

What's the rate of children born to unwed mothers? Something like 30% or better. Lord, if I guy's not gonna commit to something, what makes these women think they'll commit to 18 years of child support. I agree that the laws need to be changed FOR BOTH MEN AND WOMEN WHO OWE CHILD SUPPORT.

I can understand the OP frustration because no parent, mother or father, should not help support the child.

The largest problem is that most non-custodial parents always feel the monetary support doesn't go to the child so it only benefits the custodial parent. Still others feel that the money is a means of controlling visitation.

Most people do no realize that support is different from visitation.

If the couple remained together, the financial resposibility is still there. This does not change just because you are no longer together.

It is both parents duties to ensure the financial support of the child, not just the "other" parent.

Our society has become too accepting, over the past decades, of raising children to not take responsibility for their actions and now those children are the adults that do not support these kids.

We need to change our methods of raising children to include the notion that, no matter what happens between the parents, the child is all that matters.

Just my opinion.

I can understand the OP frustration because no parent, mother or father, should not help support the child.

The largest problem is that most non-custodial parents always feel the monetary support doesn't go to the child so it only benefits the custodial parent. Still others feel that the money is a means of controlling visitation.

Most people do no realize that support is different from visitation.

If the couple remained together, the financial resposibility is still there. This does not change just because you are no longer together.

It is both parents duties to ensure the financial support of the child, not just the "other" parent.

Our society has become too accepting, over the past decades, of raising children to not take responsibility for their actions and now those children are the adults that do not support these kids.

We need to change our methods of raising children to include the notion that, no matter what happens between the parents, the child is all that matters.

Just my opinion.

I can understand the OP frustration because no parent, mother or father, should not help support the child.

The largest problem is that most non-custodial parents always feel the monetary support doesn't go to the child so it only benefits the custodial parent. Still others feel that the money is a means of controlling visitation.

Most people do no realize that support is different from visitation.

If the couple remained together, the financial resposibility is still there. This does not change just because you are no longer together.

It is both parents duties to ensure the financial support of the child, not just the "other" parent.

Our society has become too accepting, over the past decades, of raising children to not take responsibility for their actions and now those children are the adults that do not support these kids.

We need to change our methods of raising children to include the notion that, no matter what happens between the parents, the child is all that matters.

Just my opinion.

I can understand the OP frustration because no parent, mother or father, should not help support the child.

The largest problem is that most non-custodial parents always feel the monetary support doesn't go to the child so it only benefits the custodial parent. Still others feel that the money is a means of controlling visitation.

Most people do no realize that support is different from visitation.

If the couple remained together, the financial resposibility is still there. This does not change just because you are no longer together.

It is both parents duties to ensure the financial support of the child, not just the "other" parent.

Our society has become too accepting, over the past decades, of raising children to not take responsibility for their actions and now those children are the adults that do not support these kids.

We need to change our methods of raising children to include the notion that, no matter what happens between the parents, the child is all that matters.

Just my opinion.

Hey Marc, you're right - it does take two to make a baby, and it should take two to raise a baby. You're so quick to judge, but if you read, she was married to him, loser or not. So now she's stuck raising the child on her own, with not even financial help from the dad. And before you start bashing me, I am happily married to a wonderful husband who is a great father to our child. But I have seen too many people struggling to raise a child on their own. Why shouldn't the father have some responsibility???

Laura,

While "deadbeat" has been coined as a term mainly addressing Fathers, let me assure you there are MANY, MANY deadbeat mothers out there who have abandoned their children.

When working for support enforcement I recall many cases in which the mother simply abandoned a husband and several children. Never paying court ordered support and not visiting the children.

Before you elect to bash only men for this, realize that coin has two sides.

Women can't wait to jump in the sack with men that have run away from other women and kids. It's like a sick game to see who gets the loozer. Lady, the guy is a loser but you picked him, so what does that make you besides dumb? For you that have done it, get off your butts, find a job to support the babies that YOU chose to have, get off the food stamps, and stop porking the drunks you meet at the local bar.

I am so sick of reading these reports about these low life men that up and vanish leaving their children behind.

How many children are going to have to be raised by the mother's who are trying to do it alone? While the next man says how horrible that is, and how he would never, and then turn right around and do the same thing to the next. Over and over and over again this continues.

Why can't we come together and put these men in jail (as if) not jail (we feed them there) a deserted island or something for ABANDONMENT towards their own children!

The government can't even figure out how to get the fathers to pay out a lousy amount of money each month to at least "help" the mother with raising the kids financially, let alone do ANYTHING AT ALL about emotional abandonment.

This system needs some attention. There are enough people in the US that live this life daily! Maybe the laws need to be changed?!!

You know in China there is a one child per family law. I'll just bet people are much more particular about bringing children into the world over there.

Maybe our government should limit the amount of children people can have? They may think twice about having them to begin with at that point. Who their partner is, when they REALLY want children, and if it truly WOULD be THAT person they would choose. If not there would be less women in this situation because these men could no longer have children after their allotted children have been conceived.

Mandatory vasectomy & hysterectomy after their "allotted children" may just make these people more accountable BEFORE the fact. (to include me btw)

Just a few thoughts on our American children who are victims of abuse called abandonment.

If nothing else, teach your children (especially daughter's) about self worth, and when the time is to have children, and to be extremely picky on the choice they make.


An ANGRY American!