Man banned from leaving Israel for 8k years over child support payments | Hacker News Reader

Man banned from leaving Israel for 8k years over child support payments

m.jpost.com

36 pointstomerbd11 comments

There are some important details missing here, but $3.3 million over 18 years is about $15k per month. Assuming that the 18 years are passed and he never paid a penny of support. Even if the guy had 5 kids that’s still $3000 a month per kid. Which raises the question: why isn’t there a cap to the amount someone has to pay for child support? Are analytical chemists so well compensated that they can afford $15k a month in child support?

From the article:

"Israel’s laws regarding divorce and child support have faced previous criticism for being vague and unjust.

Director Sorin Luca, who is creating a documentary about Israel's divorce laws called "No Exit Order", purports that “A woman can easily put a travel ban on the father, with a demand for child support which can extend to the entire duration of the childhood.” “Once a father has the order, he can be imprisoned for up to 21 days, whether he has the ability to pay or not – without any investigation of his finances. Men are expected to pay 100% or even more of their income to pay for their children,” Luca continues.

Ergo: never father a child in Israel. Problem solved.

AFAIKT the "director" may be incorrect. He doesn't provide any credentials / documents / corroborated testimony with all side heard. I am not an expert on, and have not investigated the matter. (BUT) I choose not to believe random people on face value. (Or a journalist quoting some guy)

Wtf would child support not cover the entire duration of childhood?

Ignore women, go your own way.

The $3.4 million referenced in the article is AUD not USD. At current exchange rates it would be just over $2.39 million USD.

The minimal details are missing from the article. Maybe he was a very rich abusive violent spouse who had 4 affairs and 25 children. I really don't know.

This is not journalism.

Maybe his case is unjust maybe it isn't. I would like to hear at least one other voice besides his in the article.

Edit: why the down votes? Do you have some additional details I'm missing?

We are talking about a real person.

Regardless of the justice/injustice here, it was unnecessary to bring up completely specious bad behaviors consisting of entirely different legal issues, irrelevant behavior, and unlikely facts, none of which were mentioned in the article anywhere.

A desire for more information is reasonable, though. The extreme seeming situation raises many questions for me too.

I did emphasize that I do not know. Giving an extreme but possible situation is kind of the point. The wife, the prosecutors, the judges, and the legislators, are also real people, the article portraits them as stupid or malevolent. I would like to also hear their side.

Agreed.

My mention of the defendant being a "real person" is simply that attaching very negative hypotheticals to a public conversation about a real person is bad habit that has both intentionally and unintentionally hurt many people. Better to avoid that.

An it wasn't necessary for your good point.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com