This isn't a two parent family so your statement above is full of holes. This is a divorced family with a child support order. One that the NCP is REFUSING to follow.
Actually, it is a two parent family. There are still two parents, and still a child who they are BOTH responsible for.
And if the NCP is not working for these reasons (which I doubt given what the OP wrote), then the NCP needs to file for a modification. The NCP in this case is REFUSING to do that. And that is not the CP's fault.
So, you're saying that you think that the CP wouldn't be gunning to have the NCP arrested if he would just go to court and ask for a modification? I doubt it. Someone who is vindictive enough to stage a set up so that the other party ends up in jail, and their child doesn't have to go to the other persons house anymore, is very unlikely to do that.
The NCP is totally in the wrong here and should be arrested.
You're entitled to your opinion. My opinion differs. I don't think that anyone should be jailed for non-payment of a debt. You don't go to jail if you don't pay your credit cards, or your mortgage, or your car payment. There is no due process when you are jailed for non-payment of CS, which violates the 14th amendment. We did away with debtors prisons back in the 1800's. Two states constitutions prohibit incarceration for non-payment of a civil debt.
I don't think much thought is being given to what being thrown in jail does to a persons life. While you're sitting in jail you can't work, and therefore are unable to pay any of your debts. You stand to lose your job (if you have one), lose your residence, and possibly your means of transportation and posessions. Even a short term in jail can have significant negative affect on a person. It is a viscous cycle that is extremely difficult to detach from. There is also
significant impact on the child, who won't see her father who has been
consistently involved in her life. Sheltering her from seeing her father arrested will not shelter her from the impact of everything else that follows.
Do I think that he should be helping to support the child? Yes. But I don't think that setting him up to be thrown in jail is the answer. You don't seek to destroy someone's life and a child's relationship with one of their parents because that parent isn't conforming to what you want them to do. I think most parents would gladly take on additional financial burden it meant that their children would grow up happy, healthy and emotionally stable. Children who are deprived of a relationship with one of their parents are at risk for severe social problems - teenage pregnancy, drug use, delinquency, domestic violence. The list goes on. Studies have shown that even a parent that is less than ideal is better than no parent at all. Yet there are people who would put money before their child's psychological health. That's what I think this poster is doing and I do not agree with it.