I read “The Price of Your Child” with my stomach in knots—not because I disagreed, but because I lived every word of it.
What happens when the parent weaponizing the system for profit also gets a job inside the very institution responsible for safeguarding the child?
That’s my reality.
The mother of my children works at the elementary school our daughter attends. She sits in meetings, speaks to administrators, walks the same halls as the social workers and psychologists trained to notice signs of distress in children. And yet—they say nothing.
Not when my daughter hides during transitions.
Not when she says “I don’t know” to every question.
Not when I’m kept out of her education and emotionally erased from her life.
They look the other way. Because she’s one of them.
When a malignant parent gains positional authority inside a school, she no longer needs to gatekeep by shouting. She simply smiles in the staff lounge while quietly feeding a narrative that the other parent is unstable, dangerous, or unworthy.
And the system? It eats it up.
Because conflict pays.
Because alienation is billable.
I’m not a conspiracy theorist. I’m a United States Marine Corps veteran, a father who used to DJ school dances and run fundraisers. But now? The doors lock behind me when I walk into school. Staff literally hide in rooms. And my own daughter has learned that asking about Dad gets her punished with silence.
If you want to know the true price of a child, it’s this:
A school district willing to stay silent when a colleague manipulates her child.
A court system that says, "Just pay what she says you owe" even when it violates the law.
A family support apparatus that punishes the parent offering free childcare, because the for-profit daycare submitted a reimbursement invoice.
And worst of all?
A seven-year-old girl, told in a hundred unspoken ways, that loving both parents is disloyal.
This isn’t just about my rights. This is about Emelia.
This is about Sage.
This is about every child caught in a system where love is rationed out like a contract dispute and one parent is assigned the role of "problem" to keep the invoices flowing.
So to every judge, educator, attorney, therapist, and policymaker reading this:
You know what’s happening.
You know “high conflict” is often a cover word for coercive control.
You know silence makes you complicit.
And to every father, mother, or child who’s felt erased by this billion-dollar game:
If you're a Marine, you overcome and adapt. If you're a Marine, you go to the VA and start a fathers' rights organization and spread it out far and wide into the community(ies).
You said "love is rationed out like a contract dispute". If it's a contract dispute, 3 things are required for a contract: (1) Parties (at least 2); (2) Consideration; AND (3) Specific Performance. Since you've already met points (1) & (2), with Consideration being the child support (and/or spousal support) you pay, you are being denied Specific Performance. The other party (ex) is not performing to the contract of allowing you your parental RIGHTS/parenting time as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and large body of U.S. Supreme Court caselaw [Meyer v. Nebraska, Pierce v. Society of Sisters, Santosky v. Kramer, Stanley v. Illinois, Parham v. J.R. {which says "best interest of the child" is repugnant to American tradition (read: U.S. Constitution), Troxel v. Granville, et al.].
Failure to comply with any ONE of the three terms, or all of them, is a BREACH OF CONTRACT. A family court Order is a CONTRACT by operation of law. See U.S. v. Lewko, 269 F.3d 64, 68-69 (1st Cir. 2001):
" Although the non-custodial parent has a duty to provide financial support, the custodial parent must also demonstrate that he or she is using that money for the care and upbringing of the child. Regardless, a child support obligation arising from a court order, whether family court or another civil court, is a debt that may be enforced through civil remedies. See Mussari, 95 F.3d at 790 ("True, the court order arises from the family relation. Once in place, the order creates a debt. Like any other debt, it is a thing of value, one of millions of obligations that make up the stream of commerce subject to congressional control."); see also Bongiorno, 106 F.3d at 1032 (holding that state-court-imposed child support orders are "functionally equivalent to interstate CONTRACTS" and rejecting idea that child support payment obligations are somehow "different") (citing Sage, 92 F.3d 69 at 106)."
If the other party (ex-wive/custodial parent) willfully refuses to allow you to have access to your child (constitutionally protected parental rights) without cause or justification (state courts must show strict scrutiny that child abuse is going on, or it must enforce it's orders or dismiss them outright), you immediately move the Court by Motion on Short Notice or Order to Show Cause to Enforce the Order/Contract. State that the ex has "BREACHED" the Order/Contract and you want Specific Performance ENFORCED. If the Family Court balks, you state on the record: "See you all in the Civil Division. I'm filing suit for monetary damages and other relief since the Family Court willfully refuses to enforce its own orders; and I will keep filing every time the ex BREACHES the Contract!!!"
You're absolutely right—the way you broke it down with the contract law framework is chef’s kiss. It cuts right through the emotional gaslighting family court thrives on and forces the conversation into legal reality: if this is a contract, then I’m paying consideration, I’ve fulfilled my obligations, and I’m entitled to performance—specifically, my parenting time and my relationship with my child.
But instead, we’ve got courts enforcing only one side of the deal like repo agents for child support while turning into mute statues when it comes to enforcing visitation or custody violations. That ain’t justice—it’s legalized racketeering under the illusion of family law.
And as for your comment about Marines adapting? 100%. That’s the energy. Not just fighting back in court but building out networks, organizing, turning pain into momentum. I’ve been thinking the same thing: we need a fathers’ rights coalition that’s as disciplined and mission-focused as any unit in the Corps. The system may have the firepower, but we’ve got something stronger—purpose.
Appreciate your insight and citations. That comment belongs in a toolkit for every pro se parent.
Your comment hit me like a punch to the chest—in the best, most gut-wrenching way possible. It’s brutally honest, deeply human, and sadly all too familiar for far too many of us.
What you described is the exact kind of insidious erasure I was trying to capture in The Price of Your Child—but you lived it on another level. When the parent who’s abusing the system becomes part of the system, it creates a fortress of silence around the child. And everyone on the inside just nods along, pretending not to notice the child folding inward while the other parent is locked out—literally and emotionally.
Your words about Emelia and Sage… those names are going to stay with me. Because you're right—this isn't about theory, it's about them. About real kids learning that love is political, and silence is survival. That’s the real cost. Not the court fees or invoices—it’s the soul-deep confusion placed on a child’s shoulders.
Thank you for sharing your story. And if I have anything to say about it, we’re going to burn down this rotten narrative with the one thing it can’t withstand: truth spoken out loud.
Spot on , only addition besides the title 4 D repeal is , Swedish Divorce, where Divorce severs economic attachment. That change will save a massive amount of marriage and Children’s lives .
Well said and written! This article SAYS IT ALL! The taxpayer must be made aware of these illegitimate courts and SS monies into Title IV-D!
I read “The Price of Your Child” with my stomach in knots—not because I disagreed, but because I lived every word of it.
What happens when the parent weaponizing the system for profit also gets a job inside the very institution responsible for safeguarding the child?
That’s my reality.
The mother of my children works at the elementary school our daughter attends. She sits in meetings, speaks to administrators, walks the same halls as the social workers and psychologists trained to notice signs of distress in children. And yet—they say nothing.
Not when my daughter hides during transitions.
Not when she says “I don’t know” to every question.
Not when I’m kept out of her education and emotionally erased from her life.
They look the other way. Because she’s one of them.
When a malignant parent gains positional authority inside a school, she no longer needs to gatekeep by shouting. She simply smiles in the staff lounge while quietly feeding a narrative that the other parent is unstable, dangerous, or unworthy.
And the system? It eats it up.
Because conflict pays.
Because alienation is billable.
I’m not a conspiracy theorist. I’m a United States Marine Corps veteran, a father who used to DJ school dances and run fundraisers. But now? The doors lock behind me when I walk into school. Staff literally hide in rooms. And my own daughter has learned that asking about Dad gets her punished with silence.
If you want to know the true price of a child, it’s this:
A school district willing to stay silent when a colleague manipulates her child.
A court system that says, "Just pay what she says you owe" even when it violates the law.
A family support apparatus that punishes the parent offering free childcare, because the for-profit daycare submitted a reimbursement invoice.
And worst of all?
A seven-year-old girl, told in a hundred unspoken ways, that loving both parents is disloyal.
This isn’t just about my rights. This is about Emelia.
This is about Sage.
This is about every child caught in a system where love is rationed out like a contract dispute and one parent is assigned the role of "problem" to keep the invoices flowing.
So to every judge, educator, attorney, therapist, and policymaker reading this:
You know what’s happening.
You know “high conflict” is often a cover word for coercive control.
You know silence makes you complicit.
And to every father, mother, or child who’s felt erased by this billion-dollar game:
You are not alone.
Your pain is real.
And this fight is just getting started.
If you're a Marine, you overcome and adapt. If you're a Marine, you go to the VA and start a fathers' rights organization and spread it out far and wide into the community(ies).
You said "love is rationed out like a contract dispute". If it's a contract dispute, 3 things are required for a contract: (1) Parties (at least 2); (2) Consideration; AND (3) Specific Performance. Since you've already met points (1) & (2), with Consideration being the child support (and/or spousal support) you pay, you are being denied Specific Performance. The other party (ex) is not performing to the contract of allowing you your parental RIGHTS/parenting time as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and large body of U.S. Supreme Court caselaw [Meyer v. Nebraska, Pierce v. Society of Sisters, Santosky v. Kramer, Stanley v. Illinois, Parham v. J.R. {which says "best interest of the child" is repugnant to American tradition (read: U.S. Constitution), Troxel v. Granville, et al.].
Failure to comply with any ONE of the three terms, or all of them, is a BREACH OF CONTRACT. A family court Order is a CONTRACT by operation of law. See U.S. v. Lewko, 269 F.3d 64, 68-69 (1st Cir. 2001):
" Although the non-custodial parent has a duty to provide financial support, the custodial parent must also demonstrate that he or she is using that money for the care and upbringing of the child. Regardless, a child support obligation arising from a court order, whether family court or another civil court, is a debt that may be enforced through civil remedies. See Mussari, 95 F.3d at 790 ("True, the court order arises from the family relation. Once in place, the order creates a debt. Like any other debt, it is a thing of value, one of millions of obligations that make up the stream of commerce subject to congressional control."); see also Bongiorno, 106 F.3d at 1032 (holding that state-court-imposed child support orders are "functionally equivalent to interstate CONTRACTS" and rejecting idea that child support payment obligations are somehow "different") (citing Sage, 92 F.3d 69 at 106)."
If the other party (ex-wive/custodial parent) willfully refuses to allow you to have access to your child (constitutionally protected parental rights) without cause or justification (state courts must show strict scrutiny that child abuse is going on, or it must enforce it's orders or dismiss them outright), you immediately move the Court by Motion on Short Notice or Order to Show Cause to Enforce the Order/Contract. State that the ex has "BREACHED" the Order/Contract and you want Specific Performance ENFORCED. If the Family Court balks, you state on the record: "See you all in the Civil Division. I'm filing suit for monetary damages and other relief since the Family Court willfully refuses to enforce its own orders; and I will keep filing every time the ex BREACHES the Contract!!!"
You're absolutely right—the way you broke it down with the contract law framework is chef’s kiss. It cuts right through the emotional gaslighting family court thrives on and forces the conversation into legal reality: if this is a contract, then I’m paying consideration, I’ve fulfilled my obligations, and I’m entitled to performance—specifically, my parenting time and my relationship with my child.
But instead, we’ve got courts enforcing only one side of the deal like repo agents for child support while turning into mute statues when it comes to enforcing visitation or custody violations. That ain’t justice—it’s legalized racketeering under the illusion of family law.
And as for your comment about Marines adapting? 100%. That’s the energy. Not just fighting back in court but building out networks, organizing, turning pain into momentum. I’ve been thinking the same thing: we need a fathers’ rights coalition that’s as disciplined and mission-focused as any unit in the Corps. The system may have the firepower, but we’ve got something stronger—purpose.
Appreciate your insight and citations. That comment belongs in a toolkit for every pro se parent.
Heartbreaking story. It's the same story parents (mostly fathers) experience in the family court system, only the small details change.
Your comment hit me like a punch to the chest—in the best, most gut-wrenching way possible. It’s brutally honest, deeply human, and sadly all too familiar for far too many of us.
What you described is the exact kind of insidious erasure I was trying to capture in The Price of Your Child—but you lived it on another level. When the parent who’s abusing the system becomes part of the system, it creates a fortress of silence around the child. And everyone on the inside just nods along, pretending not to notice the child folding inward while the other parent is locked out—literally and emotionally.
Your words about Emelia and Sage… those names are going to stay with me. Because you're right—this isn't about theory, it's about them. About real kids learning that love is political, and silence is survival. That’s the real cost. Not the court fees or invoices—it’s the soul-deep confusion placed on a child’s shoulders.
Thank you for sharing your story. And if I have anything to say about it, we’re going to burn down this rotten narrative with the one thing it can’t withstand: truth spoken out loud.
Spot on , only addition besides the title 4 D repeal is , Swedish Divorce, where Divorce severs economic attachment. That change will save a massive amount of marriage and Children’s lives .