April, 2009 Update: Fox Abandons its reality show
Bad Dads

Fox's Bad Dads Campaign Update
May 13th, 2008

Two weeks ago we launched a campaign against Fox's proposed reality show Bad Dads. Bad Dads unfairly depicts divorced fathers as uncaring and selfish, and publicly humiliates children of broken families by depicting their fathers as not loving or caring for them.

Fox has received over 5,000 calls, letters, and faxes from our supporters, and our protest garnered coverage in over 300 newspapers. Nearly a hundred educators, mental health experts, and family law professionals publicly condemned Fox's Bad Dads and endorsed our campaign. We also drew support from advocates for low income families.

As Kathleen Parker noted in her syndicated column, this campaign was an early, preemptive strike. The pilot has not been made yet, and all that has been contracted is a 10 minute promo for a pilot. We now have good reason to believe that we will never see Bad Dads aired.

Given the large response and media coverage, we have made our point to Fox, and have decided to suspend the campaign against Bad Dads. We will continue to monitor the situation, and if in the future we have good reason to believe that Fox will be going ahead with the show, we will renew our efforts. The campaign web page will remain up, as will all relevant information concerning the campaign.

Thanks to all of you who participated in what we believe has been a successful campaign.

Sincerely,

Dr. Ned Holstein, president of Fathers & Families
Dr. Linda Nielsen, president of the American Coalition for Fathers & Children
Glenn Sacks, newspaper columnist/radio host, www.GlennSacks.com

Protest Fox's New Reality Show Bad Dads!

Fox recently announced its intention to launch a new reality show called Bad Dads. According to Reuters, in Bad Dads Jim Durham, director of the National Child Support Center, "functions as a sort of 'Dog the Bounty Hunter' for tracking deadbeats...[Durham's role is as] an avenger of penniless single mothers [who] hunts down deadbeat dads and forces them to pay child support...

"In the pilot, a financially destitute mom is contrasted with her wealthy ex-husband, who is living the high life. Durham confronts the man at his country club to shake him down in front his friends. It's ambush reality TV."

According to Reuters, Durham will target fathers who are behind on their child support by "making their lives miserable -- foreclosing on their house, repossessing their car. He will squeeze them..."

We oppose Bad Dads for six reasons:

• Bad Dads publicly humiliates children of broken families by depicting their fathers as not loving or caring for them.
  Bad Dads publicly humiliates children in single parent families by depicting their fathers as not loving or caring for them. How is a child to feel when he or she sees their dad being vilified on TV because he allegedly doesn't love or provide for them? How is the child to feel when he or she is reminded of this by friends or teased about it on the schoolyard?

  Yes, reality shows do sometimes intrude on people's privacy, but rarely do they cast aspersions on something as intimate and emotional as a parent's love for their children. Also, most reality show participants are volunteers. These children did not volunteer to be humiliated on national television.

  To send a protest email and fax to the leading executives at Fox, click here.

  Close

  
   
• Bad Dads unfairly depicts divorced fathers as uncaring and selfish, when research clearly shows that most divorced dads pay their child support and remain a part of their children's lives, often under difficult circumstances.
  Fox's Los Angeles-based producers have decided to launch an apparently Los Angeles-based show on "deadbeat dads." Yet the California Department of Child Support Services itself recently reported that the overwhelming majority of "deadbeat dads" are the product of problems and abuses within the child support system.

  According to a CDCSS report issued in January, there are four main reasons why some California noncustodial parents have been unable to fully pay their child support, and not one of them is the fault of the child support obligor. The four factors are:

  1) “high child support orders [are] established for low-income obligors”

  2) "[After the obligor has suffered a drop in income] a limited number of child support orders [are] adjusted downward"

  3) “accrual of 10 percent interest on child support debt.” (Over a quarter of these arrears is interest)

  4) “establishment of retroactive child support orders” (For an explanation of this, click here).

  According to the California Judicial Council, 80% of California child support debtors earn poverty level wages.

  David Engle, director of the Washington County Department of Social Services in Maryland, recently acknowledged this reality. He said

  "The No. 1 reason why people can't pay their support is they're not able to find a job, or a job doesn't give them sufficient funds to pay the support."

  To send a protest email and fax to the leading executives at Fox, click here.

  Close

  
   
• The records of the child support agencies are notorious for being riddled with errors--they cannot be relied upon to determine who is a legitimate "deadbeat" and who isn't.
  “It’s extremely sloppy. It’s just a total inattention to making sure these numbers are right."--Missouri Child Support Auditor Susan Montee

  Another reason why Fox's Bad Dads is a bad idea is that, as many studies have shown, the child support arrearages which are claimed against alleged "deadbeat dads" are often (if not usually) erroneous. Child support enforcement agencies are notorious for their incompetence, waste, and the incessant computer errors which lead to the persecution of innocent citizens.

  When the State Auditor of Massachusetts examined child support records in that state, it found that the official arrearages were incorrect in 92% of the cases it examined. (Report No. 99-0142-3). The Auditor concluded:

  “The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Enforcement and Tracking System (COMETS) does not maintain accurate arrears balances.”

  Bruce Walker, the former head of the Oklahoma child support enforcement program, wrote in the Christian Science Monitor, "The bookkeeping in child support offices is atrocious."

  A 2007 Missouri study found that the amount allegedly owed by the child support obligor was incorrect in 27% of the cases. Moreover, the study only looked at one narrow aspect of the arrearages--had the entire picture been studied, the actual number of errors found would have been far higher. According to the Kansas City Star's  Audit's criticizes Missouri's child-support record-keeping (10/19/07):

  "In some cases, the audit found, record-keeping was so far off that parents were shown as owing $309,409 to $454,647 more than they actually owed...
   
  “'It’s extremely sloppy,' Montee said of the division’s system of tracking back child support. 'It’s just a total inattention to making sure these numbers are right.'

  "The result, she said, is that unjustified enforcement actions against some parents — like paycheck deductions or confiscation of passports — may be taking place..."

  According to SmartMoney magazine:

  "You could find a deadbeat dad hunter knocking on your door even if you're paid up on child support. It happened to Otto Tidwell. The host of a home-improvement radio show (Mr. Fix-It) in Denver, Tidwell was surprised when he got a call in 1999 from a private agency saying he owed around $200,000, dating to his divorce in 1974.
  
  "'The collector was very aggressive and threatening, calling me a deadbeat dad, saying they were going to get me one way or another, that there are remedies for people like me,' says Tidwell, 60. 'There were threats of court action; they were going to attach my wages and do all sorts of things. They even called my wife and threatened her to get to me.'
  
  "True, Tidwell had once fallen behind in his support payments by $672, but that was back in 1981, and he had long since caught up. He tried to explain that to the collection agent but didn't make much headway. 'She didn't care,' he recalls.
  
  "Tidwell called the courts to get proof he was paid up. Then he called in his lawyer, who fired off a letter to the firm slamming its 'intimidation and coercion' and 'unsupported harassment.' The firm eventually backed off, but not before Tidwell had the pants scared off him. 'If I hadn't kept every bit of documentation with me, they might be hounding me to this day. Or I might have even been suckered into paying something I didn't owe.'"

  In April 2006, Herbert Chalmers of St. Louis, Missouri killed himself and three others, including two members of the family whose business was garnisheeing his wages. Chalmers’ withholding had been doubled and he was left with only $400 a month from his paychecks. He repeatedly and bitterly claimed he was the victim of a child support enforcement error but it was only after the killings that an investigation was conducted. The result? According to Missouri officials, Chalmers had been correct—due to a clerical error, he was being garnisheed five times what he actually owed.

  The St. Louis Post-Dispatch interviewed a man whose family members were killed in the spree, who told them "If it was a mistake, it cost the lives of my family."

  The procession of cases of child support errors is absolutely endless--to learn about just a few, see Servicemen victimized by child support system (World Net Daily, 6/27/07), Child Support Enforcement Accuses Teenage Boy of Fathering Child When He Was Three, Tennessee Child Support Enforcement Abuses Innocent Dad, Texas AG Greg Abbott Screws Up Again; and Child Support Enforcement Abuses Soldier Bound for Iraq

  To send a protest email and fax to the leading executives at Fox, click here.

  Close

  
   
• Bad Dads singles out fathers for shaming, when U.S. Census data shows that noncustodial fathers are more likely to pay their child support than noncustodial mothers.
  Noncustodial mothers--so-called "deadbeat moms"--fare worse in the child support system than noncustodial fathers do. According to US Census data, noncustodial mothers are 20% more likely to default on their child support obligations than noncustodial fathers.

  This is despite the fact that noncustodial mothers are less likely to be required to pay child support, and those with support obligations are asked to pay a smaller percentage of their income in child support than noncustodial fathers. These facts were reported by Fox itself in the Fox News article "Moms Can Be Deadbeats, Too." There is absolutely no reason to name the show "Bad Dads" when the average noncustodial father is more likely to pay his child support than the average noncustodial mother.

  To send a protest email and fax to the leading executives at Fox, click here.

  Close

   
   
• Bad Dads glorifies private collection companies whose practices are so abusive that even the National Organization for Women has condemned them and urged women to avoid them.
  The tactics of private child support collection agencies are so abusive that many leading feminists and women's advocates have condemned the agencies and urged limiting or eliminating their role in child support collection. For example, the National Organization for Women says "privatizing child support collection is a truly bad idea." They explain:

  "Unregulated private collection companies keep 30 to 40% of the funds secured from parents owing support payments. As we have seen from experiences in various states where private collection companies operate in child support payment collection, some families get nothing back – even after paying hefty fees for those services...vulnerable families [are subjected] to potentially unscrupulous collection companies."

  According to TIME Magazine's Deadbeat Profiteers (9/2/02), "aggravated spouses...gripe [about] profiteering companies...State agencies and nonprofit organizations have received hundreds of complaints in the past few years from clients who feel bilked. Some custodial parents don't realize how difficult the contracts are to cancel and find themselves paying exorbitant fees for services that aren't fully delivered...[they're accused of] misleading advertising and unconscionable contracts."

  Geraldine Jensen, founder of the Association for Children for Enforcement of Support, whose members are custodial parents seeking child support, says:

  "We have all sorts of people who have gone to private agencies and feel ripped off and lied to...[the firms] are preying on people."

  The Chicago Tribune also detailed some of these abuses in its article Firms lean on deadbeats--then on moms (9/27/02).

  In addition, child support collector Jim Durham, who is at the center of Fox's Bad Dads, has been the target of many custodial mothers' complaints.

  According to Reuters, "Child support collectors have come under fire for charging steep fees and using ultra-aggressive tactics. [Jim Durham, director of the National Child Support Center, who is the central figure in Bad Dads], bills his clients 34% of whatever he collects."

  SmartMoney magazine detailed private child support collections agencies' abuses in their article Mother's Little Helpers (8/2/02), and they specifically point to Durham as one of the leading culprits. According to SmartMoney:

  "National takes a whopping 34% of any money that comes in. That's not just of collections it has a hand in. It's of any child support the parent forks out until the back sum is paid...the bill creeps even higher once other charges such as application and administration fees are tacked on...

  "Talk to parents and advocacy groups and it isn't long before you come across tales of people locked into contracts they didn't understand. Of private agencies taking a cut of money they hadn't helped collect, such as wages garnished by the government. Of firms harassing noncustodial parents with questionable tactics...
  
  "With complaints pouring in from moms, some states are mulling over putting hard caps on the amount private firms can collect."

  Some of the National Child Support Center's tactics are so bad that even fellow private child support collectors have protested. According to SmartMoney:

  "Michael 'Doc' McCoy, who runs Child Support Intervention in Fort Worth, Tex, [is] a former bail bondsman and longtime bounty hunter, [and] he's an outspoken critic of many of his fellow collectors. The fees they charge are 'excessive,' he says. He voluntarily changed his own rate structure, reducing his cut from 30 to 20% after the first year, and allows himself a maximum of three years on a case once payments begin so he doesn't keep milking moms. His epiphany came three years ago, when he realized his firm was siphoning off 30% on a case in which it had found the guy years ago. 'One day I looked at it and said, 'Why are we still taking money when we're not doing anything?'"

  To send a protest email and fax to the leading executives at Fox, click here.

  Close

   
   
• Television is rife with negative, misleading and unfair depictions of fathers--Bad Dads promises to be one of the worst examples.

  The negative way the media portrays men and fathers has been drawing increasing scrutiny and mainstream media attention. As syndicated advice columnist Amy Alkon recently wrote about Fox's Bad Dads, "I'm tired of the demonization of men." Many successful, highly-visible commentators have recently gone on record as opposing the negative way the media portrays men and fathers. These include:

  • Syndicated columnist Kathleen Parker, whose weekly columns appear in 300 newspapers;
  • TV host Bill Maher;
  • CBS News anchor Charles Osgood;
  • Nationally syndicated radio-talk-show host Laura Schlessinger
  • Leading advertising executives Bob Jeffery, chairman of JWT, one of the world's largest advertising agencies
  • Marian Salzman, chief marketing officer of Porter Novelli
  • Syndicated columnist Jacey Eckhart
  • Chicago Tribune columnist Ross Werland
  • Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit
  • Christine B. Whelan, author of "Why Smart Men Marry Smart Women"
  • Major-market-talk-show hosts Al Rantel, Mike McConnell, Ron Smith and Joe Elliott
  • Syndicated Advice Columnist Amy Alkon

  How fathers are portrayed matters. Fatherlessness is one of the greatest threats our children face. Syndicated columnist Leonard Pitts Jr. recently said: "Twenty-eight percent of American kids ... are growing up in fatherless homes, heir to all the struggle and dysfunction that condition portends. ... Who can deny those [are] appalling numbers[?]"
  
  Among the many ills of fatherlessness are much higher rates of teen drug abuse, crime, pregnancy and school dropouts.
  
  While the media's negative depiction of fathers certainly isn't the cause of fatherlessness, it is part of the problem. In a TV culture like ours, the fact that the only fathers one can see on TV are buffoons and villains does influence young people's perceptions of fathers.
  
  For young men, it makes it less likely they'll aspire to be fathers, see their own value as fathers or, as Mr. Pitts explains, want to do the "hard but crucial work of being Dad." For young women, it means they'll be more likely to be misled into thinking that their children's fathers aren't important, that divorce or separation from them is no big deal, or that they should, as is the increasing trend, simply dispense with dad altogether and have children on their own.

  To send a protest email and fax to the leading executives at Fox, click here.

  Close