Prohibiting procreation: a step in the right direction to protect the children of deadbeat dads; an analysis of the court decision in State v. Oakley.

• Author: Kryszak, Andrea C.

1. INTRODUCTION II. STATE v. OAKLEY A. Policy Considerations B. Circuit Court Opinion C. Second Circuit District Court of Appeals of Wisconsin Opinion D. The Wisconsin Supreme Court's Majority Opinion III. STATE V. OAKLEY: DISSENT A. Dissenting Justice Ann Walsh Bradley B. Dissenting Justice Diane S. Sykes IV. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN STATE v. OAKLEY V. THE DETRIMENTAL EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PAY CHILD SUPPORT ON CHILDREN A. The Relationship Between Neglect and Depression B. The Background of Depression C. The Definition of Depression D. The Effects of Depression on Children and Adolescents E. The Causes of Depression 1. Parental Practices & Personality 2. Genetic Vulnerability 3. Divorce and Parental Separation 4. Actual Case Studies Signifying the Cause and Effect of Depression F. Preventative Measures & Treatment G. The Effects of a Depressed Parent on a Child H. Childhood Depression and Suicide I. Summarization of Parental Neglect and Childhood Depression VI. REMEDIES A. Societal B. Special Programs C. Government Intervention D. Legislation E. Summarization of Remedies to Childhood Depression VII. CONCLUSION I. INTRODUCTION

   David Oakley was born in 1966, at Taycheedah Correctional Institution in Fond du Lac, Wisconsin. (2) He never knew his father and was raised by his grandparents and the State of Wisconsin in a home for delinquent boys. (3) By the time he was twenty-one, Oakley had fathered four children with two different women. (4) At the age of thirty-four, Oakley had been divorced twice and had nine children with four different women. (5) Oakley amassed $25 in unpaid child support and was charged as a repeat offender, with seven counts of intentionally refusing to provide child support. (6) His repeat offender status resulted from a conviction for intimidating two witnesses in a child abuse case involving one of his children. (7) Oakley's criminal record also included convictions for disorderly conduct, receiving stolen property, and felony possession of a firearm. (8)

   Oakley plead no contest to three counts of intentionally refusing to support his children and was sentenced to three years in prison on the first count, a stayed eight year sentence on the last two counts, and a five-year period of probation consecutive to his incarceration. (9) The circuit court judge imposed as a condition of his probation that Oakley refrain from having any more children until he could show that he was supporting his current children, and that he could support an additional child. (10) Oakley's appeal of his probation order failed in the Wisconsin Court of Appeals, 2nd District, and in the Supreme Court of Wisconsin. (11) On December 2, 2002, the United States Supreme Court denied the petition for writ of certiorari. (12)

   This note will entail an in-depth analysis of the Wisconsin Supreme Court's majority opinion and the dissent. This note will also provide support for the majority opinion by evaluating how the court's decision will help protect the children of individuals like Oakley, who intentionally refuse to support them. While some may claim that the probation condition to prohibit Oakley from procreating was a drastic measure, it was the appropriate measure for the court to take. This sentence will serve as a deterrent to Oakley and other fathers who intentionally refuse to support their children. The probation condition will prevent any future children from being subjected to Oakley's neglect. It will also help the nine children that he already has because Oakley will be able to work full-time and he will have the means to provide child support to the four mothers of these children. Based upon the fact that Oakley is not incarcerated, he has the opportunity to establish a relationship with his children, which is sorely needed. One of his daughters is so disgusted with him that she wishes to change her last name. (13) Another child stated that she has never received any Christmas or birthday presents from her father. (14)

   Children are our society's most important assets and they must be protected. The effect of failing to pay child support and neglecting one's children leads to dramatic results. This note will illustrate how this behavior contributes to childhood depression. This depression carries over into adulthood and repeats itself when depressed adults have children. Our courts and legislature must find a way to stop this cycle. The majority opinion in Oakley took a step in the right direction.

   Part II of this note documents the policy considerations and reasoning behind the Manitowoc County's Circuit Court opinion, the Second District Court of Appeals of Wisconsin decision and the Wisconsin Supreme Court's majority opinion. Part III will analyze the reasoning of the two female justices who provided written dissents. Part IV will provide the most recent update on Oakley's case in the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Part V will discuss how a child's mental health is detrimentally affected when his or her parent intentionally refuses to support them. Part VI will propose ideas that could help the plight of children in these situations. Part VII will conclude with the proposition that the Oakley decision was necessary to protect his children from any further harm.

2. STATE v. OAKLEY

   1. Policy Considerations

      A parent who refuses to pay child support contributes to the likelihood that the child will suffer from poor health, behavioral problems, delinquency, low educational attainment, and childhood poverty. (15) Statistics show that one third of all single parent households with child support awards, or orders, do not receive any support from the other parent. (16) In 1997, nonpayment of child support led to a deficit of $10.6 billion dollars. (17)

      In an effort to address this crisis, Congress passed the Deadbeat Parents Punishment Act (18) in 1998, to establish felony violations for failure to pay legal child support obligations. (19) The Wisconsin legislature also attached severe sanctions for those failing to pay child support. (20) A person who intentionally fails to provide child support will be charged with a Class E felony if 120 days or more have passed, and the person knows or reasonably should know that he or she has a legal obligation to pay support. (21) The sentence for a Class E felony conviction is a fine not to exceed $50, or incarceration not to exceed fifteen years, or both. (22)

      These recent legislative efforts and policy concerns to protect children from deadbeat dads or parents were the driving force behind the majority opinion detailed below.

   2. Circuit Court Opinion

      Originally, Oakley was charged with nine counts of intentionally failing to support his nine children, but per the prosecutor's information, he was only charged with failing to intentionally support seven of his children. (23) Oakley entered into a plea agreement in regard to these charges but this agreement was withdrawn when the court granted the State of Wisconsin's motion to withdraw the plea agreement. In a subsequent plea agreement, Oakley plead no contest to three counts of intentionally failing to support his children. (24) The other four counts were dismissed and the State of Wisconsin agreed to limit his sentence to a total of six years for all counts. (25) Circuit court Judge Hazlewood sentenced Oakley to a three-year period of incarceration on the first count, a stayed eight-year period of incarceration on the last two counts and a five-year period of probation consecutive to his incarceration, which barred Oakley from having any more children "until he could show the court that he had the means to support them and had been consistently supporting the children he already had." (26) Judge Hazlewood was well aware of the person he was dealing with: a man who intentionally intimidated his own child, the victim and witness, in a child abuse case, and a man who made many false promises to support his children. (27) This case did not involve a parent who could not pay child support; it involved a man who intentionally refused to provide any support to his nine children despite numerous court orders requiring him to do so. (28) These orders did not dictate an actual dollar amount, but a percentage of Oakley's income, so it was within his ability, regardless of his income and the number of children, to comply with these orders. (29)

   3. Second District Court of Appeals of Wisconsin Opinion

      Oakley appealed the circuit court's decision on numerous grounds. One of Oakley's contentions was that his out of state prison transfer defeated the circuit court's intention to have him support his children while incarcerated, through a work-release program. (30) The Second District Court of Appeals of Wisconsin dismissed this argument (31) because Oakley had erroneously relied upon a Dane County circuit court opinion that had been overruled in a Wisconsin appellate court. (32) In addition to the fact that another circuit court's decision has no precedential effect on another circuit court, the court of appeals stated that it was apparent to the circuit court during Oakley's sentencing that there was a possibility he would be transferred to an out of state facility. (33) This new factor presented by Oakley was not enough to warrant being resentenced. (34) The court of appeals also stated that the circuit court did not contemplate that Oakley would support his children during his incarceration. (35) The circuit court's sentencing remarks provided that Oakley's incarceration was meant to serve other goals such as deterring other parents from failing to support their children and it was a means to punish Oakley for his intentional behavior. (36) The circuit court noted that Oakley would not be in a position to provide any meaningful support to his children while incarcerated. (37) Again, Oakley failed to provide sufficient evidence warranting a new sentence. (38)

      Oakley's second contention on appeal was that the probation order, barring...