In Pompey v. Cochran, 685 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), the alleged contemnor, Pompey, failed to attend the hearing on why he should not be held in contempt for failing to pay support. After the hearing, the hearing officer recommended, and the trial court approved, an order finding that Pompey was in willful contempt of court; that he had the present ability to comply; and that he was to be incarcerated for a period of 179 days unless he paid the support arrearage in the amount of $ 22,100 within a set period of time. Pompey failed to pay the purge amount and an order of arrest and commitment was issued. Pompey appealed, contending that there was no evidence in the record to support a finding that he had the present ability to pay the purge amount set by the court. The district court first noted that "the ability to comply is the linchpin of civil contempt." Pompey, 685 So. 2d at 1013. The district court then applied our decision in Bowen v. Bowen, 471 So. 2d 1274 (Fla. 1985), concluding that Pompey's failure to appear and failure to rebut the presumption of his ability to pay was sufficient to find that he willfully failed to pay support; however, the court concluded that some affirmative evidence of Pompey's present ability to pay was required before he could be incarcerated. Because there was no evidence of his present ability to pay, the district court found that Pompey had been wrongfully incarcerated. The court noted its lack of sympathy for recalcitrant parents who fail to pay support, but concluded that the constitutional rights of individuals required its conclusion. In analyzing this issue, the district court suggested a procedure to ensure that the constitutional rights of alleged contemnors are protected.