Fraud

What happens when a government agency tells a judge one thing in court, but its own records appear to tell a completely different story?

That is the question we’ve been asking for years.

Since 2006, the Florida Department of Revenue has repeatedly stated in court before a Hillsborough County judge that my husband’s child support case involved only two children.

But when we examine the child support paperwork and Child Support Enforcement records, we repeatedly see three children listed as dependents throughout the case.

So which is it?

If the case truly involved only two children, why do the agency’s own records repeatedly reference three? Why does the paperwork appear inconsistent with what has been represented in court?

An even bigger question comes from the agency’s own records.

If my husband was never paying child support for a third child, why do the case notes show the custodial parent contacting Child Support Enforcement to request that he receive credit because that third child was living with him?

That doesn’t make sense.

How can someone receive child support credit for a child they supposedly were never paying support for in the first place?

These are fair questions, yet every time we have raised these discrepancies with Florida Child Support Enforcement, our concerns have been denied—even when the information appears in their own records and paperwork.

Over the years, we’ve also watched hearing after hearing where it has seemed that the concerns of the custodial parent carried far more weight than those of the non-custodial parent. From our perspective, fathers are too often treated as though their voices don’t matter, while legitimate questions go unanswered.

Another issue that deserves scrutiny is whether child support can be pursued using inaccurate or fraudulent documentation. If a birth certificate contains false information, what safeguards exist to prevent someone from obtaining child support based on that document? Those are questions that deserve clear answers.

We’re not asking anyone to simply take our word for it.

We’re asking people to look at the records, compare them to what was said in court, and ask the same questions we have been asking for years.

Accountability matters.

Transparency matters.

The truth matters.

I am not going to stop speaking about these issues until we get real answers, someone is held accountable where appropriate, and meaningful changes are made to ensure families receive fair treatment under the law.

Because when the paperwork doesn’t match the story and we deserve an explanation.

For years, we’ve been told the same thing by the Florida Department of Revenue in court: my husband’s child support case involved only two children. But, three children are clearly listed. not only by Child Support Enforcement themselves, but also by the ex-wife. That contradiction has never been adequately explained.

Why has this discrepancy existed since 2006? Those questions deserve answers—not excuses, not denials, and certainly not silence.

How can an agency dismiss what is documented in its own file?

These aren’t rhetorical questions. They are questions that affect real families, real parents, and real children. This isn’t about refusing to support children. Parents should absolutely support their children.

Government agencies should be held to the same standard of accountability they expect from the citizens they serve.

For nearly two decades, we’ve been searching for answers.

 If there are legitimate questions surrounding legal parentage or the authenticity of documents used in a case, shouldn’t those questions be fully investigated before child support obligations are enforced?

I know some people would rather I stop talking about this.

I’m not going to. Not until the questions are answered. Not until inconsistencies are addressed. Not until accountability exists where accountability is warranted.

Because if even one family is being harmed by mistakes, inconsistencies, or failures within the system, then those problems deserve attention—not silence.

The goal isn’t revenge.

The goal is transparency.

And I will continue asking questions until there are answers.