Witness:  Mr. Dennis Tichelkamp, Prosecutor, Springfield, Missouri

     DENNIS TICHELKAMP: Good morning. I want to thank the assembly people here for letting me speak today.

     DOUGHERTY: Real close to the microphone.

     TICHELKAMP: I'm Dennis Tichelkamp, Greene County Prosecutor's Office. I'm going to follow the mandate........

     DOUGHERTY: Excuse me, where are you from?

     TICHELKAMP: Greene County, Springfield, Missouri. I'll try to follow the mandate of Senator Caskey.

     I do have a problem with people constantly using the word, "deadbeat". I have reporters coming, and they invariably want to use the word "deadbeat". I don't think that's productive. I think it's acrimonies to people, and it's disrespectful, and I don't think it's serving any useful purpose.

     Most people want to be treated fairly. That's the main thing, and when they get to the government agencies, sometimes they feel they aren't being treated fairly, and that bothers a lot of people. Whether it's a custodial parent or the non-custodial parent, and let me tell you, I've got plenty of hard tear stories to tell you today if I want to, regarding custodial parents and what happens to them. I hear from many custodial parents that they would like the non-custodial parent to take an interest in their child, to send the birthday cards. They gripe when they don't send the birthday cards. They gripe when they don't exercise the visitation, and let me say when they don't exercise the visitation, it costs these people money. They have to feed the child during that weekend. They have to buy babysitters, and sometimes they need a break from the child, and so when people, and I usually go into a litany when I talk to people. I say, look, you're supposed to pick the kid up on Friday evening. Be there at 6:00. Don't be there at 7:00, because while she had to go to a movie, and she was supposed to bring the kid back at nine, on Sunday, bring the child back at nine, don't be there at ten, because then she's going to whether there was a car accident, and I tell her, if he can take care of a sick kid as well as you can. The kid is too sick to go out, and show him, and give him a makeup weekend. Part of that is being reasonable. Sometimes these people aren't being reasonable, because they don't get along, and one of the things they have to do, they each know how to pull each other's chain, and they drive down that road, they get in that rut, and they can't get out of that rut, and that's a problem, and what we're here, or you're here, I believe, is to try to find out where is the problem, not these fringe cases here, or this fringe case here. Where's the norm, and when the brush that we paint with law, will it cause more problems or less problems, and it may alleviate the problems that you're trying to alleviate, but it may cause more problems, and you have to fashion a law that's going to be proper for as many people as possible.

     Now, one of the things that was passed in the recent assembly was on the visitation. You know if you deny visitation without good cause, it used to be after 30 consecutive days, now there's not that day limitation. That creates a problems for enforcement. It's going to take more time for prosecutors offices and the Department of Division of Child Support Enforcement to determine when where was there a good cause. When where was there not. You're asking nonattorneys like the DCSE to get involved in that, and that creates a big problem, and I saw nothing in that provision if you want to talk about fair, where that when the person doesn't exercise a visitation that child support doesn't automatically increase because they didn't see their child, and if you're going to be fair, you need to be fair both ways, and, that's what I would say about that.

     The other thing in that legislation on license suspension. My concern with that is that it may be underutilized. Right now, they don't have the policies in place. You have to start suspensions, and I talked to a prosecutor in Kentucky the other day. He told me they had four million people, that last year, they suspended 14 people. So, how much it's going to be utilized is one thing. So, that's something that the legislature should consider.

     Another thing, with the license suspension, I think on the insurance, if someone gets suspended and you take the insurance company, or not suspended, yeah, get suspended, and the insurance company says, wait a minute here. I want to raise your insurance rates. That person, then, has to make a decision whether to pay child support and pay a higher insurance rate. I, personally, don't think that the insurance company should be able to raise the rates because it had nothing to do with driving. The only reason it got suspended was because of the child support, and what's going to happen is, they're going to get suspended, because no insurance, then they're going to drive without a license. They're driving while license suspended, and that will be a twelve point violation, and they will be under an SR 22 for a long period of time. I think something needs to be addressed so that these people aren't unfairly sanctioned because of a license suspended, not due to driving.

     And, as I said before, I am a little concerned about the set off on the visitation because the problem with the enforceability of it, also give it quid pro quo from when they don't exercise visitation to the child support. Doesn't automatically increase to help cover the additional cost that the custodial parent has to be involved with.

     There's two other issues I'd like to talk about. Mainly, emancipation and mediation.

     With the mediation, Dwight Scroggens of of Bucannan County, he has someone in his office that's to help mediate problems with visitation, and I talked to Teresa Kaiser regarding, perhaps, putting a trained mediator in our office to help with these people to mediate the differences between child support and visitation. That is a major problem. We either get federal financial participation funds at 66 percent on the cost of that, that would, could help offset that cost. It will not do a whole lot for the people that really just can't stand each other, but it will do an awful lot for the people that really has some problems of communication I've heard during the divorce or that occurring now, and that may be able to work it out with them. It would be a low cost alternative, and the one reason I say that it should be in the office rather than say in the court system, or over here, because you know what happens is, they go through the system. They go through DCSE, which is the Division of Child Support Enforcement. They talk. They don't hold for 10 or 15 minutes or however long it takes. Then, they might go to establishment worker where that child support is established, then it goes to another caseworker who does enforcement, then it's setting on hold again, and they're worrying about how to get their child support. They're worrying how to pay the child support, and then it goes to the prosecutor's office, and then come out of the prosecutor's office, now, they're going to tell them to go to another office to talk to mediator, but they're only making five dollars and something an hour. That's time it costs them money. And, so, as much as it can be in one office is better, and it also improves the communication within the office personnel, themselves, because you want get the adversarial relationship, you might get, if you have someone like in the prosecutor's office and someone at the Friend of the Court, would have difference of oponion. You got right down the hall, it's a lot different than down the street, or up another floor, and it makes for a better communication skills, and a more likely, satisfactory completion of a scenario.

     Now, I am concerned on the emancipation issue. We have it where that if child support continues until 18, but now you've got to take 12 hours for each term. Well, what's a term? You know, there's different classes. I know one child that he got his high school diploma, and he went not through GED, but through a diploma thing. He got emancipated because the court felt that wasn't continuing his education. When you put 12 hours that does not take into account that there's not always a fall semester, a spring semester, and a summer term. You know, under the way the statute's written, that you might have to take 12 hours during summer term, when, in fact, that six hours in the summer term is a full-time load. It doesn't take into account that child support does not automatically increase just because you go to college. The child support, many times, was set before you went to college, so that's not automatically kicked in, and DCSE does factor in college expenses when they're doing a  Form 14 on modification.

     The other thing I would say to that is that, to send a kid 12 hours to college, that cost over a thousand dollars. Many of these parents, if they're not getting their child support, how are they going to pay for the college tuition? Then when they can't pay for that semester, that child's emancipated, and once emancipated, under Missouri law, generally, always emancipated.

     The next problem is, what if they have two kids that's in college? How are they going to pay for both those kids that go to college? It amazes me that if we had a child in our house, and we kicked the child out at 18, because they weren't working, going to school, how some of our neighbors might think why did we do that, but, yes, it becomes totally acceptable when a child, when you're in a separated home that to kick that child out when they're 18. What you're really doing, when you're forcing that person to end that child support at 18, when they don't get their - if they don't take 12 hours a turn, you're forcing that person to either kick that child out, or they're going to get in trouble with other kids, or they're going to get pregnant, or they're going to get in some other type of problems, or you're going to keep that kid in the home, and you're going to drain resources from the other family members, and that creates a problem. I, personally, like the old law of 21. I don't think that many people like that, but it lets the court determine whether or not this child is really emancipated, and lets that court take in all the facts. I do wish the court would spend more time with domestic relation matters. They're under pressure to move cases, and they've got to move those cases, but with domestic relations matter, it's not just one, two, three, four, does this fit, is this relevant? A lot of times people just want to have their say, and sometimes that might mean listening to stuff that you know is not relevant, but sometimes you've got to let people get things off their chest. And, a lot of times I feel that the courts are sometimes reluctant to do that.

     But the part of the reason why they're reluctant to do that, is they have so many cases to do. But, I think that need to reexamine that attitude.

     The other thing I would like say is, and most kids aren't perfect, especially if they come, sometimes when they come from a separated family. If you make a child emancipated, because they don't go to college that one term. Maybe that child is just not mature enough yet. Maybe that child has some  problems. Maybe that child has some problems because the father or the mother didn't take an interest, whoever the non-custodial parent is, and, sometimes it takes time for a child to straighten up. I can give you myself, as an example. I wasn't the best student at first when I came out of high school. I kind of goofed off. Now, my parents stayed together, and my dad would pay child support if they had gotten divorced, whether there was a court order or not, but, it took me a couple of years to straighten up. Now, if I was emancipated, and because I didn't go to college, initially, maybe I wouldn't have finished college. Maybe I wouldn't have finished law school, maybe I wouldn't have done those things. I think that you ought to look at some laws that's going to change the age of emancipation. If you're not going to change the age status, to at least change the hours requirements, to at least have a hardship provision, say you become emancipated because you didn't do those things, that a court can determine whether or not to reimpose the child support because you are now going to school, and you're trying to actively participate. I would also say that why should someone who are not paying the child support be allowed to use this so that, I won't pay my child support, therefore, they can't pay the tuition. Therefore, I get the child emancipated. That's also a scenario that can easily happen.

     Now, I kind of cut my 20 minutes down to five minutes.

     CASKEY: Are you finished? Are you ready for questions?

     TICHELKAMP: Yes, Sir, unless you want to give me more time.

     CASKEY: Toward the end, we may call you back. Representative Kasten.

     KASTEN: I assume from what you're saying about the needs, look at all aspects that you would need for family court.

     TICHELKAMP: Well, family court. Just saying family court doesn't mean a lot. It's what you do with - the devils and the details, and I think that's what you've got to look at is, I think that a lot of these people are looking for low cost. Everybody has two sides to the story. I'll allow you money that all these people that testified, the other side is going to say something that's just as terrible on their side. The thing to do is how can you deliver the services, be as fair to both people, even if you give them a bad answer that they don't want, can at least feel like they've been treated fairly. That's all a lot of times people - if you're going to make someone go to Hades, make them proud to go, is what the old saying goes, and so you treat people fairly, then you decide how can we do this as cheaply as possible, and you're not going to get rid of the hard cases, and that's what the attorneys should be handling. Some of the easier cases, though, can be solved, like for instance, the mediator. It doesn't necessarily have to be the prosecutor's office. It could be at the DCSE office, but somewhere where they can help siphon through some of these things and maybe work out - you might work out 20, 30 percent of the cases, and you can evaluate whether or not that's a cost justification. Do a cost benefit analysis. I do feel like when you paint a real broad brush to get those kids like the judge said, basket weaving, you know sometimes kids do that or they take, like that one kid that took one course, but now is getting his high school diploma, and yet the appeals court said he was emancipated. You're hurting the kids that need the aid and assistance and they won't be able to get it. How many parents do you know that make $12,000 a year going to be able to send two kids that just got out high school to college at 12 hours a semester, especially if they're getting a child support award of say, $300.00 a month for both kids, and they're not even getting it on a regular basis. Is that fair to that person to end that child support for them? Is it fair when they don't have the money to put their child into college, and you're going to end the child support. That's why I, personally, believe, and plus, if a child is going to go to college, they'll make that decision eventually, and if they're going to go to work full-time, they'll make that decision, too. I gave them a long-winded answer. I'm sorry.

     CASKEY: Representative Green.

     GREEN: Thank you, Senator. In your position as a prosecutor, how often do you see your office prosecuting child support violators?

     TICHELKAMP: Child support violators?

     GREEN: Yes, failure to pay support.

     TICHELKAMP: Well, we do that quite a bit. I run a division that that's all we do.

     GREEN: Okay, how often do you prosecute failure to enforce visitation?

     TICHELKAMP: Sir, I run a child support division. That's in another division.

     GREEN: You're in Greene County prosecutor's office.

     TICHELKAMP: Right, but I run a - I wouldn't have that information to give to you, because I don't run those divisions. I would say that I would not put a quid pro quo. You know what I tell people. I say, I don't care if you never paid a dime in child support. You should allow that visitation, because when they don't pay their child support, who suffers? I think, because a non-custodial suffers, because they don't pay the child support. I think the child suffers, and I think the custodial parent suffers. By the same token, I don't care if she never lets him see that child. He should pay that child support. Why? Because the same scenario occurs, because too often people want to tie visitation with the child support. We're going to punish you. If you don't get the visitation, we're going to take your child support away. Why do you want to punish a child twice. I mean, if the child is not getting visitation, they're getting punished.

     GREEN: My question is, if we can get back to it, you probably have associations and if you're dealing with child support enforcement, you have meetings, you never hear of transpire of any prosecutors prosecuting to enforce visitation?

     TICHELKAMP: Sir, I did a study on that a few years ago, and, actually, I think St. Louis County had the most proactive approach, and I don't want to - it may be different not, but they took the most active approach about ensuring the visitation.

     GREEN: Thank you.

     TICHELKAMP: But, that was a few years ago. It wouldn't be current, and I don't deal with.....

     GREEN: I think the one question where I'm coming from is I have a prosecutor testifying, and what I have heard from testimony in the last year, and in the last two days, is if you're going to enforce child support, can you please enforce my child's visitation rights, and I'm just curious as how much prosecutors enforce visitation. That's where my question is, because that's where all the testimony is geared to right now.

     TICHELKAMP: Well, I think that you all take a broad look at everything and how it affects....

     GREEN: I think that we are taking a broader look.

     TICHELKAMP: Okay.

     GREEN: I've been doing my job as a Representative, listening to people testify that their visitation isn't enforced. So, when I see a prosecutor, I'm asking that question. Thank you.

     CASKEY: Let me ask you a question, and would you address this issue. In the previous witness, we saw where policemen were actually practicing law, and enforcing what they perceived a decree or judgment to set forth. Policemen receive no training in interpretation of divorce decrees, and for them to enforce selectively a judgment, probably tends to do more injustice than it does justice. What would you see that we should, legislatively, in order to ensure that if policemen are going to be enforcing judgments or divorce decrees, dissolution decrees, that they be prepared and enforce them evenly and accurately?

     TICHELKAMP: Well, I think that would be the goal. Police officers aren't attorneys, and unless you break it down to where it's, yes, no, yes, no, they'll have problems. When you get into the ambiguous state, that's when the police officer is going to have problems, and I understand in that prior case that that may have been, according to the witness' testimony, that there was inequality of enforcement, and that have very well been the case. That may have been that particular officer. Whether that's the norm, I don't know. The only way that I could say that you could make it more enforceable for the police officer is to make it to whether you take the decision away that you're to see him on July 14th, 1998, at 8:00 p.m., to Sunday, July 16th, and that way there wouldn't be much of a discretion with the....

     CASKEY: Or should we just simply take it out of the hands of the police and that they not enforce the judgment or decree?

     TICHELKAMP: Well, that is certainly a remedy that could be espoused. It would be.....

     CASKEY: I mean it's unconscionable because it not the law that a policeman should tell an 81-year old lady that she's going to jail if she's harboring someone. I mean, in that particular instance, that was not the law.

     TICHELKAMP: Well, part of the thing is, you tell people we'll go to court. Well, if I had money to pay for an attorney, I would pay my child support, is what they always tell me. The same thing could be said, okay, well, if you don't get the police involved, then they're going to say, well, then, I've got to go to court. I don't have money to hire an attorney. Who's going to help me. I think you get problems when you get police involved, because you never know what's going to happen, and the police officer doesn't know, and they feel uncomfortable about it, and, that may very well be an answer for some, about taking out the police prerogative. It may not be. I don't have a quick cut opinion.

     CASKEY: Thank you. Any other questions? Did you have any other comments that you wanted to make?

     TICHELKAMP: No. Well, I do, but it will take too long.

     CASKEY: Submit it in writing, would you, please?

     TICHELKAMP: Okay.

     CASKEY: Thank you, very much, for appearing.

     TICHELKAMP: Thank you.