Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Single Parents  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Capitano_Blaugh
Joined: 3/18/2008
Msg: 481
Paying child support for kids that are not yoursPage 11 of 30    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30)

On the flip side, why don't more custodial parents who are male go after CS from the mother of their children? Is it because they earn more than the mother, or they figure they'll never get it anyway? Why don't they try more often?


That's a question I've tossed around in my head many times.

I could, if I chose to, simply say to my boys that they could live with me full-time rather than half-time if they chose to do so, and I'm pretty sure they'd go for it, which would mean that I'd be saving $hundreds a month in CS. I'm sure it'll happen sooner or later given their ages and what they say about life at their mother's place.

If they do choose to live with me, my ex would be obligated to pay me support. It wouldn't amount to much, but the only reason I can think of to collect from her would be spite. I've paid her about $70,000 so far in CS though I have kids 50% of the time, but in the end, I just can't think of a reason beyond spite for getting her to pay CS to me if the kids moved in here full-time.

I wouldn't ask her to pay because I would just rather not have any connection to her at all. I see CS as a connection that I really dislike now and would love to sever no matter which way the money goes. I like being independent. Asking her for anything would bug the hell out of me.

 My I
Joined: 1/23/2007
Msg: 482
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 1/28/2011 4:44:28 PM

I'm astounded at people's inability to exercise reading comprehension in their own language when it suits them...

I'm astounded at people's inability to understand that people can have a different opinion and not be insulted for disagreeing and/or ignoring some of the logic posted here.
Women who do not seek support from the bio-dad are not bad people. It's just that you come off as rather arrogant and ignorant to insist others should do something you are not wiliing to do, yourself.
Pitufina, you said you will not pursue your ex for support because he is a violent man and you fear him. Then, in another post, you state you'd chase him down for support if I paid for legal expenses.
Many of us can comprehend what you post. Maybe you're so used to complaining you're totally incognisant of your own bullshit and it's you who lacks coprehension
 Tealwood
Joined: 12/16/2008
Msg: 483
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 1/28/2011 5:44:54 PM
On the flip side, why don't more custodial parents who are male go after CS from the mother of their children? Is it because they earn more than the mother, or they figure they'll never get it anyway? Why don't they try more often?


Custodial father for 9++years now....I was told i could be the primary or custodial parent if i did not ask for child support. 3 lawyers...all holding the same opinion...go for it and keep your mouth shut....after 3yrs...they were of the opinion I was safe from losing primary or 50/50....

But....I made a choice...so in one manner i feel i should honour that agreement.

But the other side....what is there that requires support? I have house payments....my ex has her house payments? Why should she be assisting in my house payments?

She has heating bills as I have heating bills. As the primary custodial parent...why should she be supplementing my heating bills? after all they do go there or did go there every other weekend...and the heating is required...is it not?

Food.....so in reality what is the food cost...for one or for three?

The reality is the single parents are not looking for child support for the child...they are looking for the most part for financial supplement for what they are unable to earn themselves.

so when one looks at the numbers or the employment facts for custodial fathers as opposed to custodial mothers....we see the potential difference....one is willing to do for themselves...and one is looking for someone else to pay for their own unwillingness to be self sufficient.

the other reality......the cost that it would require is simply not worth the return....
 scottey63
Joined: 3/8/2008
Msg: 484
view profile
History
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 1/28/2011 5:49:42 PM
I'm lost. I thought this thread was about paying child support for kids that are not yours. Not from the biological father. Hence the title.
 barefootkitten
Joined: 12/17/2009
Msg: 485
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 1/28/2011 11:56:55 PM
I don't get this: you're willing to deny your daughter, just so you can maintain a whipping-boy about how hard done-by you are, and what a dead-beat her bio-dad is? Or were you, like pitufina 77, let down by the legal system? (and I'm not being sarcastic; I admit that there ARE situations where the mother has busted her hump to get CS, only to be swept at the knees)

What am I denying my daughter? I have a cs order in place....her father has done everything he can to evade paying the puny amount a judge deemed he should to support our child and the government has not been successful in helping me get money to help raise her.

I have NEVER denied my daughter's father access to her. He moved out of town and I even offered to PAY for him to come visit her and he STILL chose not to. For five years I was the one who tracked him down to let him know how she was doing, I was the one who would call to get his new address (as he moved frequently) so I could send him pictures of his child, I was the one who offered to pay for him to come see his child and have a place to stay, yet he DID NOT put in any effort whatsoever. This man has NEVER, not even once, sent his child a birthday or christmas gift, nor even ever called her on those days. When she had surgery to have her tonsils and adenoids removed, and I had called him the day before the surgery to remind him of it, he couldn't even be bothered to call AT ALL to find out if she pulled through okay. This man (and I do use that term lightly) could care less whether the daughter he claimed to love existed or how she was doing.

I took those five years off of dating so I could focus on raising our young daughter and putting myself through university so I could support our child on my own. Frankly, for those five years, the only interest he ever showed in his child was once a year when he would phone and try to convince me to get back together with him, because as he saw it, we should be married because I was his baby's momma. The last time I talked to him (5 years ago) he got very angry because our daughter had told him I started dating someone, and he saw me as his property and got mad that I moved on.

I did EVERYTHING I could to facilitate a relationship between my daughter and her father, and never have I seen visitation and cs as connected, yet STILL he did everything to avoid actually taking responsibility for HIS choices.

I don't maintain a "whipping boy" at all, nor do I dwell on what is the PAST. I am stating simple facts of what happened. If he called tomorrow and wanted to have a CONSISTENT relationship with our daughter, I'd see him as having every right to do so. I have two "rules": 1. I will not allow him to come and go in and out of our daughter's life as that's not fair to her. As I told him, if he wants to be in her life, then be IN it. But being a father isn't a matter of only doing it when it's convenient for him, or when he feels guilty enough. 2. He needs to have a SAFE environment for her to be around him. We broke up because he started using drugs and I wasn't going to have that around my child.

Both of these "rules" are because it's what's right for my child. I could care less what else he does in his life, it's not my right to control that. What I do have a right to control, however, is whether or not my daughter is safe or not. If he could provide a safe place and wanted to be an ACTIVE father in my child's life, he has every right to be and I would not only allow it, but encourage it, as I tried to do for five years. I decided five years ago, however, that I wasn't going to spend my child's life trying to force someone to be a part of it who actively showed he had no interest in her. I can't force him to be a father to her anymore than I can force him to pay our court ordered child support. And if the government can't even get cs out of him, what do you think I could do?
 barefootkitten
Joined: 12/17/2009
Msg: 486
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 1/29/2011 12:04:09 AM

Women who do not seek support from the bio-dad are not bad people. It's just that you come off as rather arrogant and ignorant to insist others should do something you are not wiliing to do, yourself.

Not receiving support is not the same as not seeking it. Just because someone has a cs order doesn't mean they actually receive money, nor does it mean the cs order is for anything close to what the custodial parent is paying to provide for the child. As I've stated before, I'm supposed to receive $100/month for the one child I have and DO NOT GET IT.

I don't think any of us who don't receive support for our children have stated that others should and/or that we haven't tried to get it for our kids. Ideally, yes, both parents should be responsible for the child they BOTH created, but the REALITY is, MANY AREN'T, despite efforts taken by the other parent to try to get them to.

Thing is, every single case is different, and anytime to try to impose a "rule" into how things should be, there will always be exceptions and cases where the rule doesn't fit. I believe it should be up to each set of parents to determine what is best for THEIR child in THEIR CASE. If the parents can decide amicably what's best for their kids, I don't see why the courts even have to be involved.
 barefootkitten
Joined: 12/17/2009
Msg: 489
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 1/29/2011 8:39:01 AM
*shrug* You're denying her more money. If your ex paid CS, then she'd be receiving more money. It's not rocket surgery.
The whole $100 per month a judge deemed her father should pay would make absolutely NO affect on my child's life. I have provided for my child financially since she was born WITHOUT her father's help. I don't need that money to raise my child, because frankly, the amount the judge said he should pay is so small, it would make no difference to her life even if I received it.

The only thing that would have made a difference in her life, money can't buy, and that's having had a father. Thankfully I have many great male role models in my extended family that have been close to her, but it's still no replacement for a father.

I may not be able to give my daughter everything she wants, but she certainly has had everything she NEEDS.


Then, you aren't a "I'd rather deny my child, and have a whipping post!" mother. You're one of those mothers who got let down by the legal system, and machinations of your ex.
I wouldn't really call it being "let down". I simply accept it as a fact of my life. Frankly, after 10 years of not having my daughter's father have any interest in her life, I could care less. It is what it is, and no amount of whining about it is going to change it, so I just accept it as the reality of my situation.


However, it doesn't make you a BETTER mother, because you tell us what a LOSER he is. It makes you better in comparison, but I'm not interested in dating him; I'm (theoretically) interested in dating you.
I'm not suggesting I'm a better mother than someone else who hasn't had my circumstances. I try not to place value judgements on people's parenting based on their situations, because that really doesn't say much about them. Personally, I think how your children turn out says far more about how you did as a parent than does the circumstances you raised them in. I did the best with the circumstances I had, that's all I can say. Faced with breaking up with my daughter's father when she was a few months old, and seeing how he immediately showed no interest in her and didn't help financially, I decided to put myself through university so that I could support her, not her father, and not the government. I see support of my child as solely my responsibility.


Y0u don't make y0urself look BETTER by making others look WORSE; and, I wanna date a WOMAN, not a MARTYR.
I'm not trying to make anyone look worse, just stating a fact of my life. I get people all the time asking me how I managed to put myself through school as a single mom, and I just shrug and ask if I really had any choice? I did what I felt I had to do, nothing more, nothing less. I would NEVER consider myself a martyr. I'm not saying that single parents should get any sort of special considerations at all, I was simply stating facts from my experience, which is, that in the end, the only people we can rely on to support our children are OURSELVES.
 My I
Joined: 1/23/2007
Msg: 490
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 2/2/2011 6:36:52 AM

Izzy, that's a concept too difficult to grasp for many. Try to see that a lot of the men here pointing the finger are basing their arguments in purely financial issues.

Hmmmm... have you read what izzy has been saying? I think not.
She has a boyfriend... he does not live with her (so she said in a previous post)... yet she is claiming to be taking on the role of mother (because she's unfit), father (because he's gone for most of the month) and provider (because know one else is around to be provider) of the kids.

If Izzy was earning a good income from that, I'd be willing to bet she wouldn't be loving or investing in the kids.

They keep on quoting studies to support the idea that because they make money, they are better parents

And if the father takes off and takes the kids from her I'm sure they'll all feel the love (sarcasm). Izzy speaks more like a nanny, not a mommy.
 My I
Joined: 1/23/2007
Msg: 492
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 2/2/2011 4:00:47 PM

I am guessing you didn't grasp my previous post My I?..You are a lost soul...I feel sorry for you...really I do..

Thanks for thoughtful consideration to worry about me.... I appreciate the gesture. But, with all due respect, maybe worry about your boyfriend's kids. The reason being, as you stated sometime ago, you don't live with your boyfriend, yet you annoint yourself as "mother" to his kids.... how self absorbed is that?

You're the lost soul - you are not those children's mother. But that's OK, in your mind you can be whoever you want, irrespective of the fact that your S.O. doesn't live with you. You're from Ontario - family court loves women who can freely appoint a man as father and also take over the mother role to collect support if your S.O. stops kissing your ass.

If you keep this going you won't have to work part time - you can keep collecting men's children and call yourself mother.... then get support
 Silverhawk_tkn
Joined: 12/3/2010
Msg: 493
view profile
History
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 2/4/2011 2:03:44 PM

I am in court with my ex-husband tomorrow...I'll let you know what sized pool I will be able to afford after we finish!



and I am just waiting for the engagement ring!!(I know he has hidden here somewhere!! I found the bill!)



...like a fat spider that hasn't quite finished sucking her first prey dry.....she already has another one getting caught up in her web. Won't be long before he's tied up like the first one and getting sucked dry...........nicely done, Liz! Well played!!
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 494
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 2/4/2011 4:10:01 PM
Izzbeth, I think your humor is lost on these guys who are probably mad at the world because THEY have to contribute to the wellbeing of their offspring. I have it on very good authority that kids will eat 3 times a day if you feed them.
As for the bfs kids, I have only skimmed this thread but it is my understanding that izzbeth is looking after them because their own mother is mentally ill and hospitalized because of that. I cannot imagine that if the kids' father had to hire someone as a full-time nanny, that this would be an inexpensive arrangement...or maybe he'd have to leave his employment and go on an assistance program so that he could be home all the time to look after his kids. While I do not know for sure, I'm gonna take a leap here and presume that Canada takes the same dim view the USA does of parents leaving children for extended periods of time without close adult supervision. So somebody has to mind these children...or should they have been turned over to the court when their mother became ill, based on the premise that the male parent must remain employed?
Cindy O
 My I
Joined: 1/23/2007
Msg: 495
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 2/4/2011 7:15:25 PM
Izzbeth, I think your humor is lost on these guys who are probably mad at the world because THEY have to contribute to the wellbeing of their offspring.

Ummmm. ... ya, that's it.
I am the custodial parent so that kinda screws up your reasoning.

While I do not know for sure, I'm gonna take a leap here and presume that Canada takes the same dim view the USA does of parents leaving children for extended periods of time without close adult supervision.

^^^Dim view?
It's illegal to leave young kids unattended.
You miss the point with Izzy..... her boyfriend doesn't live with her... how can she legally assume the mother title to kids of a man who is not her husband or common law partner?

Either way, you can fight amongst your own gender on that issue (stealing roles/titles).

As well, you cannot remove a woman as a mother just because she is mentally ill (that's an interesting stiory in itself). She may not have the capacity to be "mom" as of now. But when she is deemed worthy, Izzy can kiss her self-appointed motherhood good-bye.
 Tealwood
Joined: 12/16/2008
Msg: 496
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 2/4/2011 7:19:18 PM
Cindy --O--

Sense of humour is required when addressing a single parent who is not willing or is not capable of financially providing for their children?

But then for years we have the mythology of the gold digger...so really how should the guys be surprised?

But there are and always be those who abuse or manipulate the system to take advantage of social programs and social philosophies that were designed to assist the disadvantaged.

But then there will always be it seems a large majority of custodial parents who will work to provide for their children and do what is required without holding out their hands with the sense of entitlement that they are owed the financial support they are unwilling to do for themselves.

But then you are defending a single parent who was last year lamenting the fact that her son...and then sons wanted to live with their father....the other biological parent...and she was concerned with the loss of child support and the impact it would have on her daughter and how they were unfeeling to her plight...

Best interest of the children was not her concern.....her only concern was the impact of losing the child support...


Bottom line....the only issue was the $$$$

Cindy...it seems that is the only consideration and good to see you supporting her...as birds of a feather flock together..
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 497
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 2/4/2011 9:55:11 PM
Well,T-
since I'm a widow and don't have any kids she and I are not exactly the same kind of bird, you missed that by a mile.
I used to be in the social work field long ago, right down at the grass roots, and saw some of the idiocy that parents of BOTH genders participated in. Sometimes it made me wish that the children of divorcing parents could automatically become wards of the Court,and as wards of the Court, the children could be placed in 3rd party care if the wrangling over support and visitation got ridiculous.

But there are and always be those who abuse or manipulate the system to take advantage of social programs and social philosophies that were designed to assist the disadvantaged.

and people can assess from an internet profile and postings on a forum, or because a mother receiving assistance does not have a highly noticeable disability, or they simply do not believe that it's her genuine conviction that having several part-time parents (real parent, sitter or day care,various fill-ins, activity coaches, the television)is NOT in the childrens' best interest-people who have no training can stipulate that someone is an abuser or manipulator of the system?

But then you are defending a single parent who was last year lamenting the fact that her son...and then sons wanted to live with their father

Wow! you remember her posts from LAST YEAR? I'm lucky if I can remember even a frequent posters' posts from last WEEK.
And again, the original topic here was men who were not biological fathers but had held a father role(stepchildren, children born in the marriage but not his biological offspring) being required to pay child support. I really don't think that is fair,but again, if the man had been supporting the child,is it fair to the child to lose a great deal of provision because the parents split up?
Cindy O
 Tealwood
Joined: 12/16/2008
Msg: 498
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 2/5/2011 8:57:53 AM

Well,T-
since I'm a widow and don't have any kids she and I are not exactly the same kind of bird, you missed that by a mile.
I used to be in the social work field long ago, right down at the grass roots, and saw some of the idiocy that parents of BOTH genders participated in. Sometimes it made me wish that the children of divorcing parents could automatically become wards of the Court,and as wards of the Court, the children could be placed in 3rd party care if the wrangling over support and visitation got ridiculous


I knew you were a widow...and childless....profile and past postings....but the social services answers the reasoning behind the philosophical slant of defending the poor woman.. or the only victim is the woman...just like the soul man who seemingly only see's the woman as victims when in conflict with the men.

But growing up in a house where my father was a minister with a very strong Liberal slant as was a number of the other extended family members with their higher degree's....there were often great arguments and discussions in respect to accountability and defining who and where the problems were...

But working in a social agency...perhaps you might like to tell me how many programs and social assistance were available to woman in need ....woman who were part of the domestic violence and then compare it with the number of programs available for men

Child support is something that should be there for children....accountability is s0me thing that not just the non custodial parent should be held to task for....

Financial and emotional support should be expected on both the custodial parent and the non custodial parent....both parents should be expected to be working full time to pay for their home and to provide for their children collectively....

In many ways I have no problem with the premise of paying cs for children who are not biologically yours if you are p-art of a family dynamics...then you are supporting that structure and even after a breakdown...that structure still needs to be supported in some manner...but that means when married...that financial support or recognition needs to be recognized also...as it is just as valid as when the second marriage fails...but in Canada the mothers want it both ways.l..when in their second marriage they do not want or feel the second husband has any financial responsibilities to the children of the first marriage...that is until the marriage fails ...and the numbers of second marriages failing is much higher...then they come screaming out about loco parentis....

then we have arguments about about being financial responsible....that the non custodial work full time and pay his child support as required....while they sit at home while the kids are in school...sit at home and comp[lain about how hard it is...

I have no problems calling accountable parents...I just suggest you keep the call the same for both.....and like many social service individuals...you fail to use the same measuring sticks to both genders....why can these single mothers not be working to provide for themselves???

Why are the numbers I have posted often in respect to custodial parents...custodial mothers and custodial fathers have a wide difference in first being employed?? then being employed full time as responsible parents to provide for themselves and their children...as opposed to working part time....then review the numbers of custodial fathers receiving child support ...to custodial mothers....and define responsibility...and then this falls in line with this topic as already the numbers of custodial fathers collecting child support is so low.l..it underlines they would not be collecting from a non biological parent....

The issue is expecting a parent to be accountable for themselves and their children;..something the numbers suggest single mothers are not doing in at least 25
% of the cases...


and people can assess from an Internet profile and postings on a forum, or because a mother receiving assistance does not have a highly noticeable disability, or they simply do not believe that it's her genuine conviction that having several part-time parents (real parent, sitter or day care,various fill-ins, activity coaches, the television)is NOT in the childrens' best interest-people who have no training can stipulate that someone is an abuser or manipulator of the system?


In the case of lizzie....she has no problem defining she is working part time....because she chooses to...she suggests she did it for her younger sons and she will do it for her her daughter....and she collects the additional top up assistance programs that we have available here in Canada...those social programs that were made available to assist those who had lost their jobs or were not capable of of finding employment that would fit into parenting in their city...or town...

But then things I was able to do when I was "happily" married are not things I may be able to do now...not that I was allowed to do much anyways!!

But you make adjustments and change what you have to do after a marriages fails and you become the primary custodial parent....I did...not that hard!


Wow! you remember her posts from LAST YEAR? I'm lucky if I can remember even a frequent posters' posts from last WEEK.


I think that is what the history button is for under the profile button?....also if you have the patience and you are a fast reader....the postings go back for a few years....not to mention the search button....


And again, the original topic here was men who were not biological fathers but had held a father role(stepchildren, children born in the marriage but not his biological offspring) being required to pay child support. I really don't think that is fair,but again, if the man had been supporting the child,is it fair to the child to lose a great deal of provision because the parents split up?


LOL..no problem...but then all part of the larger picture....children of marriage number #...and #2...why is it that accountability for financial responsibility is only directed by you..and other small l leaning individuals only directed at the father or the non custodial parent?

Is it fair to the children No,,,but many things in life is unfair...and I would like to see it more fair...and that means also directing the custodial parent being held accountable in the same manner you are suggesting of the father...

require both parents to be working to provide for themselves and their children!

That enables the parents to provide for the children in the best manner,,,and enables the children to experience as much as possible in extra curricular activities....

really love Two and a half men....Allan keeps getting Judith's bills and is expected to pay them as he is working a good job...and living in his brothers house...yet Judith lives in a nice house...does not work??? and seemingly like many woman feels entitled to being taken care off....but then that is TV and not real life....??????
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 499
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 2/5/2011 4:37:39 PM

but the social services answers the reasoning behind the philosophical slant of defending the poor woman.. or the only victim is the woman..

No, the ones who are the victims and need to be defended are the children!

As for the question of the single mother working full-time or part time, how is it any better for the children OR the taxpayers if the single mother needs subsidization of childcare costs to provide a patchwork of assorted caregiving when children are often found to be better off with having a consistent and stable adult caregiver-their custodial parent, regardless of gender.
I know that tons of mothers, both single and married, work full time outside the home. If they can do that and do a decent job of handling both, or they have the childrens' father in the picture and fully committed to an equitable sharing of childrearing and housekeeping, that's fine. But the thing that many people don't understand is that the women's movement/equal rights regardless of gender thing was about having the full spectrum of CHOICE available to women, without artificial barriers set up by culture and social custom. It seems that a lot of people think that the equality movement means that women MUST be both wage-earners as well as wives and mothers...it put women in the position of being considered deficient if she didn't have BOTH family AND a career. Now, there are people who are capable of doing a superb job of both being a single parent AND a full-time wage earner, but that does not mean everyone can do that. There was a time when a single mother or a wife and mother abandoned by her husband was pretty much without any safety net outside of her family and her community...why do you think they had orphanages and poorhouses?
No, all I am defending is the children. If they have a single custodial parent who truly believes that it is better for their children that their parent be their caregiver and their supervising adult, that working full-time would result in a patchwork of caregivers and supervision, stress,anxiety, fatigue and a generally half-assed job of parenting,then I think that single parent-regardless of gender-should be allowed to make that choice. Obviously, if the single parent can find work in the hours that the children are in school, this would be a plus because a stay-at-home-parent who is not earning an income that can contribute to old-age pension is going to have it mighty rough when they reach retirement age, even if they return to the workplace full-time once the youngest child is old enough to not need adult supervision, they are going to be behind the 8ball in terms of quarters paid in to retirement pension program.
I do not know how it is now, but shortly after I moved into a different occupation, many of the subsidies that were in place to HELP a single working parent went away...and all too often it became a case where a parent who worked full-time at the average wage for unskilled occupations was DISADVANTAGING their children, as compared to some of the benefits they would receive as a stay-at-home parent. Not all of this was cash money, it was things like medical care and nutrition assistance...yes I know in Canada and the UK you have universal health care, but we don't have that in the US. Losing your MedicAid eligibility for your family because you went to work full-time for an average wage/ no-benefits job,especially if you had a child with some medical issues,was a pretty scary idea, and buying healthcare insurance on your own is EXPENSIVE.
But no, the only side I'm taking, by and large, is the CHILDRENS'. I do think that a couple of posters here are pulling some other posters leg a little bit just to stir things up...
Cindy O
 Tealwood
Joined: 12/16/2008
Msg: 500
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 2/5/2011 6:41:37 PM

But no, the only side I'm taking, by and large, is the CHILDRENS'. I do think that a couple of posters here are pulling some other posters leg a little bit just to stir things up...


I am very strong in advocating for the children...advocating that they have equal opportunity to enjoy both parents...and equal opportunity to enjoy time with both parents...and understanding that in realizing this both parents be required to work...as opposed to requiring only the non custodial to work and subsidize the lifestyle choices of the custodial parent...while she makes a choice to live off the avails and support of child support...government subsidizes and part time work....or is she even is working?


I know that tons of mothers, both single and married, work full time outside the home. If they can do that and do a decent job of handling both, or they have the childrens' father in the picture and fully committed to an equitable sharing of child-rearing and housekeeping, that's fine. But the thing that many people don't understand is that the women's movement/equal rights regardless of gender thing was about having the full spectrum of CHOICE available to women, without artificial barriers set up by culture and social custom.


Well I am happy to hear your arguement that as a woman that you should have a choice....a choice in whether you want to contribute financially to yourself and to your child....nice that you seem to suggest woman are entitled to make this choice....as opposed to men not having a choice...it is demanded of society that we be financially responsible for our children...but Cindy suggests it is not a requirement for woman...the womans movement allows an entitlement to make a choice....

I think the concept of the woman movement was to be treated and regarded in the same manner of men...you are just as capable...that would then suggest you are just as accountable....but it seems Cindy wants the perks..but does not want the responsibility..there she wants a choice as to whether a woman is to be held accountable in the same manner as the father.

Why should you or 50% of the single mothers be accorded any respect? After all... i a single father with custody...i work to provide for myself and my children because I do not expect society or any one else to do what is my responsibility....as opposed to 50% of custodial mothers who do not work or work part time..they expect the assistance for their children...but they themselves are unwilling to put in the effort themselves ...

One really must love the double standards....you expect...I think the word is hypocrite....

But there are those who do handle a career or work full time and manage being a parent.....but they are are a minority if a woman and a majority if a male..

On might say....the time has come to stand on your own two feet and stop expecting a free ride....if you want respect.
 mrcs84
Joined: 12/9/2008
Msg: 502
view profile
History
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 2/5/2011 9:38:56 PM

Why is it that people should have to pay medicare for people who make poor life choices?


I don't recall being over the age of 65 to ever have been considered a poor life choice. And the other qualifications aren't really choices. Being disabled isn't a choice. Needing dialysis isn't a choice. Having amyotrophic lateral sclerosis isn't a choice.


Why do we distinguish between who deserves help and who doesn't?


Because there has to be a cut-off at some point. We have enough people looking for a handout as it is.
 My I
Joined: 1/23/2007
Msg: 504
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 2/5/2011 10:33:15 PM

These so called women who abuse the system, on welfare are living on very little money a month.

The purpose of welfare is to provide temporary assistance.... you speak as if it is a lifestyle. But then again, some of the people on welfare "for life" seem to have an arrogance that welfare is an entitlement and they should be permitted to be handed as much money as a working person gets.... for doing nothing.
I think you are dead wrong to suggest a welfare system should increase the pay-out because that would attract more people to use the sytem.

Yes it is about giving women the choice, but there was a whole other part about recognizing the contributions that a woman makes in the home that has largely been ignored.

It's not ignored in the least bit, Jenn........ I hear women complain more about feminists than anyone or anything else. It's unfortunate the love, dignity and respect a mother recieves from spouse and children are tiotally ignored by feminists.... their movement would die if the truth were told. So, in true fashion, they exagerate fact and embelish fiction.
 mrcs84
Joined: 12/9/2008
Msg: 505
view profile
History
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 2/5/2011 10:44:01 PM
It is why politicians/court systems came up with going for a non-biological parent for child support because that was their way to deal with child poverty rather than spending money to solve child support because they don't want to help these unfit mothers who do not meet society's standard of being a good mother.

Umm...the non-bio parent concept was developed so that gay couples would have equal rights/responsibilities for adopted/surrogate/etc children.

I'm pretty sure Child Protective Services has done much when it comes unfit mothers, but I guess we'll just ignore that.


You grow all your own food completely 100% self-sufficient, self-made man.

What argument are you trying to make here? When I pay taxes on my food, I am paying for something that is directly relevant to me. When I pay taxes on things like welfare, not so much.


Everything you have done in your life you have done on your own.

Not sure what this has to do with anything. Everyone is dependent on others in some shape or form. However, when people start becoming taxpayers and being more self sufficient, they are also returning the favor to those who they depend on through they payment of said taxes. In a capitalist society, the more people that are working (over the table), the better it is for the society as a whole.
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 507
view profile
History
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 2/6/2011 7:14:39 AM
I want to suggest another consideration for those discussing the "justness" of social support programs like this.
Most of what I see here, is the same sort of arguments I see about all such programs, even including Public Education. Most people talk about how responsible the individual receiving the aid should be, how the child is most important, and how OTHER people shouldn't have to pay for their neighbors' choices, bad luck, or mistakes.
But there's another important view point to consider, which is almost never addressed: that is, what is best for US, as a SOCIETY, in a very PRACTICAL way. Public Education is easier to explain what I mean about this, so I'll use that here.
The CORRECT reason why we as a society decided to tax ourselves and pay for the education of ALL of our people, had very little to do with "helping those who couldn't afford it." The reason societies are wise to educate everyone, is because we are collectively AND individually far better off throughout our lives, if we are ALL educated. The capitalist private employers are MUCH better off, if they have an EDUCATED workforce to help them build and power their enterprises. Our national defense forces are MUCH better off, if they have an educated populace from which to draw needed people.
I suggest that this same reasoning applies to other things as well, including that caring for ALL of our children is an excellent SELFISH reason for a society to tax itself, and provide for care for the children of the indigent or otherwise unable parents. If you want to PUNISH those parents whose children you think are in need because they were or are irresponsible or selfish, that needs to be a secondary, separate issue, addressed if possible by different detailed laws; and those laws need to be written very carefully, so that hey don't interfere or outright sabotage the CORRECT goal of the laws SUPPORTING the children (i.e., don't literally throw the babies out with the bathwater).
No matter what, you will always be able to discover examples of outrageous injustice, where some schlub is taking unfair advantage of any laws. Focusing on crushing out the cheaters and lazy folks is the WRONG choice for a society to take, FOR IT'S OWN SAKE.
 mrcs84
Joined: 12/9/2008
Msg: 508
view profile
History
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 2/6/2011 8:52:57 AM

Just out of curiosity for you me with kids~~~why did you knock up some skeezebags and make some ugly ass little bama kids with them? Why did you not use protection? Why did you give your sperm away? Why did you make poor choices in women?



What kind of mother chooses an unwilling father?
But I guess we are going to completely excuse women from the complete failure to exercise due care as well as when and with whom they choose to have children.

A man should not be forced into fatherhood anymore than a woman should be forced into motherhood.

*getting a bit off topic here*
Women have children when it suits them, and they have abortions when it suits them. Hell there are thousands of women who smoke, drink, and do drugs while pregnant and all we do as a society is shake our heads and move on. IMO, those kind of women are comparable to criminals. If mommy was giving the drugs/alcohol to their 2-year old, I'm sure someone would step in.

I mean we scoff at dead beat dads all the time. Yet, we never say anything about irresponsible mothers.
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 509
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 2/6/2011 10:39:14 AM

Why is that we the taxpayers have to pay for that choice. I have no problem with someone choosing to stay at home,

If taxpayers want to stop contributing to helping those who are less fortunate, I'm sure that if enough of them band together and demand that the government stop doing that,the laws and the systems could be changed.As for those who need that help...too damn bad.They should have thought about that before they had sex/got married and had kids/ got a divorce/got disabled/got old. Or maybe we can just make that removal of the safety net applicable to parents and children and keep helping the disabled and the elderly. Maybe the tax filing system should be designed so that individual taxpayers could dictate how their individual tax dollars were spent.Write your elected representation.

and understanding that in realizing this both parents be required to work...as opposed to requiring only the non custodial to work and subsidize the lifestyle choices of the custodial parent...

That would be perfectly fine with me if there will be reliable childcare provided...it simply shifts the expense. Or, have all children of disunited parents raised in institutional settings...unless the parents are highly paid workers who can afford to pay for a full time nanny out of their own wallets.

Well I am happy to hear your arguement that as a woman that you should have a choice....a choice in whether you want to contribute financially to yourself and to your child....nice that you seem to suggest woman are entitled to make this choice....as opposed to men not having a choice...it is demanded of society that we be financially responsible for our children...but Cindy suggests it is not a requirement for woman...the womans movement allows an entitlement to make a choice....

the choice I was speaking of has nothing to do with collecting child support or government assistance.
Actually I DID make a choice, I preferred to not interrupt my employment or set aside goals in ofer to become a mother. I chose to marry a man I truly loved, who was an average workingman, rather than marry a man of high income so that I could be a career mother. Don't twist my statements.

the womans movement allows an entitlement to make a choice....

I am aware that there are people who see welfare or alimony/child support as a career choice, but I think the majority of single parents who require assistance either directly or assistance in making the absent parent help support their children did no such thing.

but it seems Cindy wants the perks..but does not want the responsibility..there she wants a choice as to whether a woman is to be held accountable in the same manner as the father.

Are you kidding me? It comes down to children cannot be put in a locker while the parent(s) work. And I am entirely in favor of men seeking full custody of children, recieving child support, and taxpayer assistance to either pay for child care or to permit the custodial parent to work a reduced schedule or not work at all if the children are below school age.
I was the one arguing that if women got equal rights, that I would be willing to accept the responsibility of being drafted into military service. And I meant it. If the US govt had called on everyone without children and capable of handling a firearm to join military service after 9/11, I would have been the first in line.

Why should you or 50% of the single mothers be accorded any respect? After all... i a single father with custody...i work to provide for myself and my children because I do not expect society or any one else to do what is my responsibility....as opposed to 50% of custodial mothers who do not work or work part time..they expect the assistance for their children...but they themselves are unwilling to put in the effort themselves ...

Do you get child support from the children's mother, or survivor or disability benefits on their behalf if she is deceased or disabled? Does your income level make you eligible for subsidization of one kind or another...nutritional assistance or child care? If you are and you CHOOSE not to, then that is YOUR choice.
The other part of that issue is that women STILL do not earn as much as men do.
I cannot speak for anyone else's decisions about whom to respect...but all other things being respectable, I do give respect to single parents who do what they believe to be in their childs' best interest,even if that means requiring child support from an absent parent or assistance from state or federal programs to make sure that the child is getting the best care. As far as I know, leaving small children alone at home while working is grounds for child protection service to remove the children and probably bring charges against the parent. It's not all that unusual for a single parent of either gender to realize that after they pay for childcare and transportation, they are basically spending their paycheck just to go to work! IF there are benefits with their job, like medical insurance, sometimes that still makes sense to continue working. I know of several situations with 2 working parent households where there is no cash gain from the lower-paid parent,but having BENEFITS outweighs the fact that they are actually spending all the cash from the paycheck to keep working.

But there are those who do handle a career or work full time and manage being a parent.....but they are are a minority if a woman and a majority if a male..

If you are talking about single parents,again it comes down to if one is actually "running in the red" to keep working. And in many 2parent households, it is simply a default decision that the mother doesn't work full-time when the children are small.

Why is it that people should have to pay medicare for people who make poor life choices?

MediCARE is for working people who have retired or become disabled, and it is nothing but medical insurance, for which one pays a monthly premium, and it has deductibles and co-pays. MedicAID is the program that covers SOME people in full.

By labelling some people deserving and others undeserving. The only people that get hurt are the children. It is why politicians/court systems came up with going for a non-biological parent for child support because that was their way to deal with child poverty


hear women complain more about feminists than anyone or anything else. It's unfortunate the love, dignity and respect a mother recieves from spouse and children are tiotally ignored by feminists....

Not all "feminists" do this. But lets' face it, the mother who does not work outside the home is often the one who is forced to rely on child support and/or assistance programs if her marriage breaks up-because there is no defined wage for homemaker/mother. Perhaps the governments should identify households that contain a wife and mother who is not a wage earner, and deduct a certain amount of money from her husbands' paycheck to be held in an account or fund that she can draw on if the marriage breaks up-or pay that money directly to her as a "wage" for being a homemaker and mother? Sounds to me like that would be a big step in "respecting" the wife and mother who does not have outside employment.

But you make adjustments and change what you have to do after a marriages fails and you become the primary custodial parent....I did...not that hard!~Tealwood~

^^^I did the same....it wasn't that hard to make the choice to work part-time after I realized I was not getting ahead and neither were my kids by continuing to spin my wheels working full-time. It wasn't that hard to adjust to a lifestyle that allowed me to be home and cooking breakfest, lunch and dinner instead of spending $30 a day at driv-thru fast food joints...

This is a very good point. if a male custodial parent finds himself going in the hole,especially if he is paying for childcare while he works,(and/or the childcare arrangements are creating as many problems as they solve!)I would think that same choice is available to him, (or some kind of subsidies) and if he chooses not to take it, this is not the fault of women! Not every single parent has a mother or sibling or cousin willing to babysit for free.

I suggest that this same reasoning applies to other things as well, including that caring for ALL of our children is an excellent SELFISH reason for a society to tax itself, and provide for care for the children of the indigent or otherwise unable parents. If you want to PUNISH those parents whose children you think are in need because they were or are irresponsible or selfish, that needs to be a secondary, separate issue, addressed if possible by different detailed laws; and those laws need to be written very carefully, so that hey don't interfere or outright sabotage the CORRECT goal of the laws SUPPORTING the children (i.e., don't literally throw the babies out with the bathwater)

Precisely!
Cindy O
 Tealwood
Joined: 12/16/2008
Msg: 510
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 2/6/2011 12:41:31 PM

If taxpayers want to stop contributing to helping those who are less fortunate, I'm sure that if enough of them band together and demand that the government stop doing that,the laws and the systems could be changed.As for those who need that help...too damn bad.


I think the response to that is found under why some see dating single mothers as foolhardy or why they have problems dating single mothers.

Yet the single mothers do not hearing that!

I would hate to see a society that turns it back on the needy...or those who need the help...I have a problem with those who make it a choice in how they choose to live...I would suggest there is a difference...those who are unable due to circumstance beyond their control...and those who make a life style choice because making dinner after working all day is too difficult!


Actually I DID make a choice, I preferred to not interrupt my employment or set aside goals in ofer to become a mother. I chose to marry a man I truly loved, who was an average workingman, rather than marry a man of high income so that I could be a career mother. Don't twist my statements.


As made a choice when I turned down two offers of employment that would have put me in middle management...since I had struggled so hard to actually be in this position of custodial parent....choices but fulfilling my responsibility to my children...without expecting others or society to supplement what I am unwilling to earn myself.


Do you get child support from the children's mother, or survivor or disability benefits on their behalf if she is deceased or disabled? Does your income level make you eligible for subsidization of one kind or another...nutritional assistance or child care? If you are and you CHOOSE not to, then that is YOUR choice.


I do not get cs from the mother of my children....she has her own house to pay for...her own heating bills...and that provides a second home for the children if they choose....Does my income qualify me...in the first 6 months...after the ex cleaned out the bank accounts...and left me without anything...and a large mortgage on a 160 acre farm...I had to ask and accept subsidized before/after school care and programs in the summer until I could re-arrange my finances and sell the property....after the sale where my ex got all the equity....but I kept the real treasures...my children I was able to manage my own finances without that assistance....


The other part of that issue is that women STILL do not earn as much as men do.


Based on a number studies looking into the bigger picture i hope this continues.....after all....the issue of who will better find jobs would indicate they are more likely to hire woman if they can pay them less??? but then that is not the real issue:: the issue is who works the longer hours...as illustrated by the numbers of custodial mothers who work part time as opposed to full time...and then compared to custodial fathers who work full time as opposed to part time...that is a big reason for the income disparity...

We seem more inclined to actually work for our financial resources...but then why not also look at the numbers of students entering into university...woman surpass men and have for many years...going into social work...which is not as well paid...as opposed to engineers...but Cindy O would be one who suggests a 4yr degree should be paid the same as any 4yr degree???

Again I hope things stay the same..but then #1 is in an engineering degree or computer programming...a male dominated field...but a field where financial remuneration is better than social workers...but she will seemingly be able to earn the same as the others in this field if she puts in the effort..and will make less if she decides to work part time...but never forget...full time employment is based on a 36 hour work week...even full time employment is wrong..when looking at gender remuneration for simple full time...36 hours to 44hrs...should not be paid the same....and women are far more likely found it seems in the 36hr work week...


If you are talking about single parents,again it comes down to if one is actually "running in the red" to keep working. And in many 2parent households, it is simply a default decision that the mother doesn't work full-time when the children are small.


Way back when married...I was directed to a number of womans groups sites...where they would council woman in exit strategies.....and today I have assisted or worked with other men to devise their own exit strategies...

Number one is get the wife back working full time ASAP

the longer she plays the game of staying at home the longer it will cost you in child support and spousal support....

Bottom line there are numerous woman who are capable and able to juggle...and numerous woman who cannot work all day and then go home and buy fast food...those are the ones who will cost you for years...and years...and years...as they look or validate their inability to actually work on the children.


But lets' face it, the mother who does not work outside the home is often the one who is forced to rely on child support and/or assistance programs if her marriage breaks up-because there is no defined wage for homemaker/mother. Perhaps the governments should identify households that contain a wife and mother who is not a wage earner, and deduct a certain amount of money from her husbands' paycheck to be held in an account or fund that she can draw on if the marriage breaks up-or pay that money directly to her as a "wage" for being a homemaker and mother? Sounds to me like that would be a big step in "respecting" the wife and mother who does not have outside employment.


You want respect...you earn it. You made a lifestyle choice to have children...why should they then be given money for making that choice...why not award those who choose not to go to university...after all...when does the idea of self reliance start and stop?

I made a choice...and i have enjoyed the last 9yrs....juggling what was required from an employment status...and what was required supporting and directing my children as they grew up.

Sorry...but getting up to make lunches...arriving back at home after work to make dinner does not require payment or special consideration...my house my choices and my responsibilities....


Sounds to me like that would be a big step in "respecting" the wife and mother who does not have outside employment.


I have great respect for a number of woman...earn your own p-aycheck...earn your own way in life...do not expect society to compensate you for your unwillingness to hold down a full time job to be able to provide for your children...


and if he chooses not to take it, this is not the fault of women! Not every single parent has a mother or sibling or cousin willing to babysit for free.


I have no sibling to fall back...I have no parent to fall back...in fact my father is a bleeding heart Liberal who sounds like you....but I have no problem demonstrating and reinforcing to him that one does not need to sponge off the system...one does not need to whine about not having enough financial support if they are willing to work for what is required.

Great thing...both daughters know what a gold digger is....both understand the importance of establishing their own career so they can stand on their own and not have to live of the avails of a man...and both were brought up to understand there is no occupation or career they themselves are unable to do...they are just as capable as any man to be a failure or to be a success....

But Cindy O...you seem to want to enable woman the choice of doing on their own...or to have others pay your way in life....
 Tealwood
Joined: 12/16/2008
Msg: 511
Paying child support for kids that are not yours
Posted: 2/6/2011 12:53:24 PM

It wasn't that hard to adjust to a lifestyle that allowed me to be home and cooking breakfest, lunch and dinner instead of spending $30 a day at driv-thru fast food joints...best decision I have ever made...and I don't really give two craps what the entire world thinks of my choices....In fact I think that certain poster should be THANKING me for making sure my kids have better manners than some I have witnessed from certain posters in here. I am raising 5 kids responsible for the future generation...I wouldn't trust that job to a patch work quilt of soccer coaches and underpaid babysitters...just sayin...your welcome!


Working full time and then coming home to cook dinner...but then working enabled me to have the financial resources to put them in soccer....dance...gymnastics...rugby...track and field....or coach them...allows to manage schedules...but standing on the sidelines you are sharing in the experiences...as opposed to not doing anything....enabling the children to be involved in outside activities.....as opposed to blaming the lack of child support as why they cannot play the sports....

But going to the Canada Games in 2009...that was a great experience for my daughter...going to school on an athletic scholarship is a great experience and something made possible by her dedication to the sports..and to her studies and supported by my ability to work full time to pay the costs associated with the rep sports.....

Bottom line....you do no favour for children by sitting at home and being unable to provide for them....the extra things in life....while trying to justify the reasons is a lack of funds from the biological parent who does not have custody...

It takes to to tango...yet only one to pay the piper...if one decides to stay at home...
Show ALL Forums  > Single Parents  >