The Backlash! - May 1996

Benefiting the bureaucrats

Is the Office of Support Enforcement is in business to benefit tax payers, or the bureaucrats who run the OSE?

by Joan L. Brewer


Editor: It’s common to assume only men (and maybe their second wives) are harmed by the Office of Support Enforcement (OSE), but the truth is that the OSE harms women (albeit, less often than men), too, as the following case demonstrates.
At the end of this article is a copy of an order against me to pay child support to the state of California. They are placing a lien against my SSI and SSA which is barely enough for me to live on as it is. As someone who qualifies for food stamps and subsidized housing, this is like the state of California stealing from the Federal government. Does it make sense?

Since I had legal custody of my children, one would wonder how this came to be. My oldest son was taken out of the state of Oregon where I had legal custody by his father. He was taken to California, where his father was able to collect welfare and food stamps, then later abandoned my son. His father had a felony record for sales and transportation of hard narcotics and numerous felony assault convictions, yet no one would help me. I didn't know about his criminal record until after I married him.

He beat me the whole time we were married and was eventually busted for drunk driving and assaulting a police officer in 1973 in King County, Washington state, which is when I found out he was a felon. Even after I found out he had a felony for assault and drugs, he was able to beat me and I was prevented from filing a complaint against him at the time because he was my husband. In the '70s, it was considered a women's fault if she was beaten and we were often harassed by the police if we reported it, even if the injuries put you in the hospital.

I fought with California for several years and the state of Oregon in an attempt to get my son back. He was placed in group homes with gang members where he was be victim of gang beatings and sexual assaults. He called me collect several times begging me to get him out of there. He hadn't broken any laws yet was being held against his will and mine by the state of California.

After many years of fighting, California gave him back two days before I was due to have spinal surgery in April 1991 for an injury I received while working for Microsoft; at the same time, I also had a complaint against the company pending with the EEOC.

When my son came home he was not the boy I last saw. He was very timid before, but now he was violent and easily enraged. Shortly after he came home he had to be put in a mental hospital because of violent out burst. Someone was calling him on the phone and provoking him.

Now, this support order. I showed the hearings officer that I had custody, and my son testified as to what his father had done. I also showed them data that supported that I was living at well below poverty level and always had. I have about $18,000 owed to me in child support for the same child by my ex-husband. Still the local Washington Hearings officer levied support against me. They wouldn't even go after his father for my support. At this time, I am also owed $2,832 in child support for my daughter, which for some unknown reason, OSE stopped collecting for me a year ago, even though the child custody order has never been changed.

My daughter is living with a girlfriend because her father told her he would pay her more child support if she left and pay it directly to her. He did this and the state allowed her father to pay her direct, instead of to me. In other words, the OSE is aiding a runaway.


STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL AND HEALTH SERVICES
DIVISION OF CHILD SUPPORT (DCS)

ORDER TO WITHHOLD AND DELIVER - LABOR AND INDUSTRIES BENEFITS

736828-0023-19960304-075628-9
TO: SOCIAL SECURITY - BENIFITS
ADMINISTRATION
675 SO LANE SUITE 401
SEATTLE W 98104

RE: Joan L Brewer

SSN: ###-##-####

INSURANCE CLAIM #: N855071

Joan L Brewer owes a child support debt totaling $ 1939.23 to Washington State. The Division of Child Support (DCS) is issuing this order to recover that child support.

This order has priority over other attachments or other legal processes. It applies to all:

  1. Employers, including federal employers.

  2. Assets or earnings that might become due the debtor during the life of this order.