Affluenza is a portmanteau word combining “affluence” and “influenza.” This word is presently defined as “the guilt or lack of motivation experienced by people who have made or inherited large amounts of money” according to Collins English Dictionary. Because the word affluenza is a neologism, it is a new word in the process of entering common use, which suggests its exact definition is still in a fluid changeable state.
A WORD WITH LEGAL INTERPRETATION
Recently, the word became associated with the Ethan Couch case. The young man’s lawyers, with the help of a psychologist, argued that the young man, who killed four people while driving drunk, couldn’t be expected to understand the consequences of his acts because his rich parents exposed him to a lifestyle which prevented him from developing empathy and responsibility toward other human beings.
The word affluenza has recently become associated with unjust or unreasonable lenience in a court of law toward the wealthy, either 1) because they have lots of money, or 2) because they have more money than the other party to the suit, meaning they can win the case through attrition. The word attrition literally means “[t]he war will usually be won by the side with greater such resources,” which turns the lawsuit into a contest.
Can the word affluenza be applied to a party’s failure to support his child? Do deadbeat dads have affluenza? Two essential elements are that 1) the party has the means to pay child support, and naturally 2) fails to do so, because possessing said means deprives him of empathy or responsibility toward his child(ren).
Perhaps here, affluenza more accurately afflicts the Family Court in its failure to prosecute deadbeat dads for the reason that the mother either 1) had no resources to sue, or 2) was not the prevailing party.
ATTRITION AND THE AMERICAN FAMILY
Westchester, New York Assistant DA Susan Pollet sees attrition as both a strategy to avoid paying child support and as coercive behavior used by the party with greater resources (usually the father) to maintain power and control over the other (usually the mother); in other words, he “initiat[es] extensive and lengthy litigation, including filing repeated, frivolous or unnecessary petitions and motions….” Both sides must retain a lawyer, and lawyers cost money. The party who cannot afford a lawyer or who runs out of money, loses. Ultimately, the cost of litigation and nonpayment falls upon the child.
CASUALTIES OF AFFLUENZA
Author and psychotherapist Phyllis Chesler states that until June of 1981, “indigent single parents (usually mothers), were eligible for free representation in custody disputes” and “the courts helped them collect unpaid child support. After that date, family law became a more mercenary practice favoring the party with greater wealth and resources (usually fathers).”
Virtually any civil action where one party has greater resources than the other can become a contest at the whim of lawyers and legal professionals. If a lawsuit for child support is simply a contest, it serves no purpose but to waste considerable time and resources.
OlivierCrafting 