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  > paying child support for non-biological children      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 cariboolady1
Joined: 3/22/2012
Msg: 51
paying child support for non-biological childrenPage 3 of 5    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
There are many reason women do not pursue the biological father of their children for support. Oftentimes, they simply are simply financially better off avoiding the court system and raising the children themselves rather then finance the legalities of going court costs to pursue someone who will never contribute.

Sorry, that is BS.
If the bio dad does not pay because he simply decides NOT to, it's very easy to go to FamilyMaintenance and get it set-up with the court order that comes with a divorce in which the judge makes a decision on the well-being of the children...meaning...child support and/or alimony for the mother. That costs nothing and FMEP is diligent about getting arrears from the deadbeat. This is what happened in my case when my husband decided to have a mid-life crisis and take off to parts unknown acting like he was nineteen again. He had a 100 grand a year job and took a leave of absence to holiday and play...forgetting that he had children. He was made...very grudgingly...to understand that being a nineteen again meant you didn't forget that you had a previous life....with children.
I worked in payroll for many years and FMEP was more than diligent in fulfilling court orders. I did so many garnishees it wasn't funny. One man had his drivers license revoked and he needed it as he was a plumber in our company. We told him to pay up or he was out of a job.

Also, no woman has the right to deny her children the right to have their real/bio father pay CS because she is miffed or has an attitude about him...or is embarrassed about being involved with him.
CS is the children's RIGHT so that they can have some kind of a decent life with activities, food, shelter, post secondary opportunities etc.
For a mother to claim "I will do it on my own" is she trying for martyr status?
The child isn't going to feel any better about her mother when she's a adult but that same child may have "father issues" due to abandonment issues because essentially the mother cut him out of her child's life to make herself look good. "He didn't pay a red cent to your upbringing, he's just a sperm."
All bio fathers are not like good ol' Dr. Huxtable. They come in all shapes, kinds and sadly not perfect at all. But...they will always be the bio dad and the child is always going to be curious about bio-dad and will find out from him what really went on when he comes calling...or when child goes looking.

Again, my question is:
Why does the court accept that mother has the RIGHT to say if she wants to go after bio-dad for CS or not on flimsy reasons and excuses?
Yet, the court can arbitrarily make a ST boyfriend be responsible for a non-bio child?
This law only serves to enable bad-ass males to spread their seed far and wide with no reprocussions and for decent hardworking responsible males to be hung for 20 plus years for a non-bio child or children that were a part of a brief fling with the mother.
It also enables non-family units. Smart males in Canada will NEVER co-habitate with a single mother or even date her. Smart males when they see a single mother should run!!!
This law really has to change because it does hurt the children the most!
 Blah_User_Name
Joined: 8/27/2011
Msg: 52
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/7/2012 11:20:59 AM

Sorry, that is BS.
If the bio dad does not pay because he simply decides NOT to, it's very easy to go to FamilyMaintenance and get it set-up with the court order that comes with a divorce in which the judge makes a decision on the well-being of the children...meaning...child support and/or alimony for the mother. That costs nothing and FMEP is diligent about getting arrears from the deadbeat. This is what happened in my case when my husband decided to have a mid-life crisis and take off to parts unknown acting like he was nineteen again. He had a 100 grand a year job and took a leave of absence to holiday and play...forgetting that he had children. He was made...very grudgingly...to understand that being a nineteen again meant you didn't forget that you had a previous life....with children.
I worked in payroll for many years and FMEP was more than diligent in fulfilling court orders. I did so many garnishees it wasn't funny. One man had his drivers license revoked and he needed it as he was a plumber in our company. We told him to pay up or he was out of a job.


BS it is not ! I have a court order for support - currently in arrears for over $60,000. In NS, that court order is registered with Maintenance Enforcement the minute it is made.

When he quit his job and apartment, they suspended his driving license and took away his ability to register a vehicle. Guess what ? He has never registered a vehicle or renewed his now expired driving license. He does not have an Health Card registered in his name - they checked that too. They also wrote to his GF's parents demanding to know his whereabouts but without their co-operation and not being allowed to track the GF there is nothing Maintenance Enforcement can do to force them to provide the information.

ME filed a Federal garnishment so in the event of a tax return being completed, that would be garnished - and guess what, there has not been a tax return filed in his name for the last 4 years.

With no address, no information about an employers, not ability to force non-family members to co-operate, no relative in this country, this is not BS. My children have not seen or heard from him in all that time. So, I repeat, with all of the costs of divorce being met by me for filing, with him continually not showing up in court and us having to reschedule, with having to prove to the judge we had done everything we could to locate him, I paid nearly an additional $25,000 in divorce costs/legal fees/costs of serving witnesses etc. IF it had not been for all the delays, I would have gotten my divorce 16 months sooner then I did. I was entitled to Legal Aid at the beginning but because he was not contributing to the household, I had to take a second and then a third job to cover the household expenses because, like you, my ex earned over $100k per annum and our home had been bought on his income level not mine as a stay-at-home parent. I followed the rules and therefore each time we rescheduled at court, I filled in the required forms regarding income - and the second my income went above that of qualifying for legal aid, he wrote and complained, demanding why as a tax payer his money was providing services for those not entitled to it ! Legal aid was immediately withdrawn ! Shortly after that, he disappeared, and my private lawyer had to serve documents on his ex boss, the GF's parents and family, etc in order to call them to court and for them to repeat their lies about not knowing where he was - on my dollar.

As I stated, I have a court order for support but that doesn't mean you actually get it !

And if you think I am the only woman in Canada who does not get the court ordered child support and no man is in arrears, you are delusional. I pay for the cost of bringing up my children, me, myself and I - and there isn't a damn thing the system can do to enforce the support order.


Also, no woman has the right to deny her children the right to have their real/bio father pay CS because she is miffed or has an attitude about him...or is embarrassed about being involved with him.
CS is the children's RIGHT so that they can have some kind of a decent life with activities, food, shelter, post secondary opportunities etc.
For a mother to claim "I will do it on my own" is she trying for martyr status?
The child isn't going to feel any better about her mother when she's a adult but that same child may have "father issues" due to abandonment issues because essentially the mother cut him out of her child's life to make herself look good. "He didn't pay a red cent to your upbringing, he's just a sperm."
All bio fathers are not like good ol' Dr. Huxtable. They come in all shapes, kinds and sadly not perfect at all. But...they will always be the bio dad and the child is always going to be curious about bio-dad and will find out from him what really went on when he comes calling...or when child goes looking.


I have not denied my children any relationship with their father - In fact, I have gone above and beyond to ensure that should he re-appear, he can contact them. I have kept the same telephone number and I have made sure the children have both kept the same e-mail addresses that they had when he chose to run. Even when my divorce was finally issued in his absence, I had my lawyer right into the agreement that should he appear in the future, he can have access to them providing the children also want that.

Yes - CS is the children's right but it doesn't mean to say they always get it and so,, yeah, I will do it on my own because my children will not go without due to the fact they only have one parent actually being a parent.

You make unjust presumptions with your 'just sperm' comment as I have never spoken negatively about my ex - I have always kept my views to myself and never said them aloud. They will make their own minds up based on actions they see and not from information I have or have not provided. My children don't even know there is a court order for support lets alone the status of it and they never will. Why not ? Because they are children and because this is an adult matter which they do not need to be aware of.


Again, my question is:
Why does the court accept that mother has the RIGHT to say if she wants to go after bio-dad for CS or not on flimsy reasons and excuses?
Yet, the court can arbitrarily make a ST boyfriend be responsible for a non-bio child?
This law only serves to enable bad-ass males to spread their seed far and wide with no reprocussions and for decent hardworking responsible males to be hung for 20 plus years for a non-bio child or children that were a part of a brief fling with the mother.
It also enables non-family units. Smart males in Canada will NEVER co-habitate with a single mother or even date her. Smart males when they see a single mother should run!!!
This law really has to change because it does hurt the children the most!


And again, I will refer you to my previous comment - just because you don't like my reality, it doesn't make it false.



 cariboolady1
Joined: 3/22/2012
Msg: 53
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/7/2012 1:00:11 PM
I am sorry that you took my reply to be directly at you. It was directed at your general statement in reply to my question. Which was a reference in a generally wide spectrum. There are many women who refuse to go after CS because they don't feel like it. That was my original concern.

Your situation, I feel, is not in the norm. Very sorry to hear that he can get away with living off of...??whatever??...he is living off these days. He sounds like a gem. Does he know that those arrears (collecting interest) will stay outstanding until the day he dies? Even if he's 95 years old?
It's very hard to get any employer at all to do "under the table" anymore, if at all. Not worth it to them.
It's very hard to be self-employed and evade the taxman for any length of time due to unreported income. Something always sets off the red flags.
Most likely he will end up in jail for his activities if he has been flouting the law and CS evaders have ended up in jail for non- payment.

I did payroll and accounting for many years and FMEP tracked many deadbeat parents very easily. It's just darn hard to hide anywhere these days!
That I feel is the norm.

My concern, again, is WHY mothers have the RIGHT to refuse CS from the bio dad? When he's out in plain site and happily going on with his own life? With no intention to bolt.
 Silverhawk_tkn
Joined: 12/3/2010
Msg: 54
view profile
History
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/7/2012 1:26:26 PM

This law only serves to enable bad-ass males to spread their seed far and wide with no reprocussions and for decent hardworking responsible males to be hung for 20 plus years for a non-bio child or children that were a part of a brief fling with the mother.
It also enables non-family units. Smart males in Canada will NEVER co-habitate with a single mother or even date her. Smart males when they see a single mother should run!!!
This law really has to change because it does hurt the children the most!



This statement is indeed correct!! It sucks to be the nice guy! Nice guys always finish last - you can take that to the bank every time!

Here are two things that are very important to remember regarding family law:

1). The government will do everything possible to PREVENT having to support (via welfare or any other social means) a family that has been split due to divorce. This means the laws are skewed to penalize those that CAN pay....not necessarily those that SHOULD pay......huge difference here.

2). Family Law is a billion dollar industry in Canada. With this kind of financial incentive, again, those that CAN pay to feed this industry will be the ones that will get stung. Case in point is that most family lawyers will review cases and take them on the potential to make money, not whether the case has potential to be won or lost. Long, drawn out divorce cases with nasty child care/support issues will ensure a large, expensive legal bill, and those nice guys with good jobs are the ones who can pay..........and they do!!

The legal industry will ensure, via legislation and lobbying, that the current laws remain as they are. There is huge money depending on it. In the law industry, no one really cares about the family unit or even the kids.....this is about money, plain and simple.

I agree completely that it is outright foolish to move in with anyone that has kids here in Canada. To do so puts you at extreme financial risk if things go sideways. Its just not worth it in my mind. Live single, and have distance relationships. This is the only way to go...........
 Silverhawk_tkn
Joined: 12/3/2010
Msg: 55
view profile
History
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/7/2012 1:33:48 PM

Your situation, I feel, is not in the norm. Very sorry to hear that he can get away with living off of...??whatever??...he is living off these days. He sounds like a gem. Does he know that those arrears (collecting interest) will stay outstanding until the day he dies? Even if he's 95 years old?
It's very hard to get any employer at all to do "under the table" anymore, if at all. Not worth it to them.
It's very hard to be self-employed and evade the taxman for any length of time due to unreported income. Something always sets off the red flags.
Most likely he will end up in jail for his activities if he has been flouting the law and CS evaders have ended up in jail for non- payment.

I did payroll and accounting for many years and FMEP tracked many deadbeat parents very easily. It's just darn hard to hide anywhere these days!
That I feel is the norm.



One other thing. Because of the unjust laws, there are orgainzations and businesses that now cater to establishing new identities for individuals that feel they have no other alternative than to run away rather than pay high sums of alimony/CS for the rest of their lives. These orgainizations will find employment, provide assitance in creating new identities, and help individuals move to other countries where Canadian law or international law has no precedence......sounds like this might have happened in this case..............
 cariboolady1
Joined: 3/22/2012
Msg: 56
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/7/2012 1:52:49 PM

Because of the unjust laws,

In her case, I don't feel that the law is unjust. He is the bio father of her children.

I think these organizations that you speak of will charge a heckuva lot of money to do this for a person. Not very many deadbeat dads can afford something like that...or leave a place of great employment wages because they don't want to pay for their children. So, I feel that is a very rare option for man to take to evade CS.
Most dads are more than happy to pay CS or share custody to see their kids. Why? Because they love them and have a sense of responsibility for them.
My son is one of them.

To OP.
What to tell the child who is now twelve?
Tell her that Daddy still loves her and always will. That things will work out in the end regardless.
 Tealwood
Joined: 12/16/2008
Msg: 57
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/7/2012 2:13:15 PM

Sorry, that is BS.
If the bio dad does not pay because he simply decides NOT to, it's very easy to go to FamilyMaintenance and get it set-up with the court order that comes with a divorce in which the judge makes a decision on the well-being of the children...meaning...child support and/or alimony for the mother.


Really....so the court order is worth what in terms of legal costs? But got to love your assumption the woman will get child support and alimony....as opposed to expectation she can do things other than lie on her back collecting her entitlement.


The thing that puzzles me the most in all of this is:
WHY does the mother have a RIGHT to say that she doesn't want child support from the BIO father and the court accepts that? And...goes after a non-bio man who was only there for two years for full child support?


Because the guy assumed a financial responsibility when he took on the woman and her child and just because the relationship fails the courts and the legal system does not allow you to walk away free and clear....the only ones who do not have to work or be financially self reliant or responsible is the custodial parent.

But...If you had a good lawyer...or had you found legal opinions you would have perhaps found the legal strategy where you require the custodial mother to first obtain a judgment from the biological father for the tabled amount and then try to minimize the required child support which hopefully would not be the tabled amount. That is not about rights...or about anything other than knowing how one can minimize the potential liabilities and offset single mothers who deem them self entitled to support without actually earning it themselves.

As to requiring a judgment from the biological father....have had 3 lawyers admit there is case law...but it is deemed aggressive and one objected to the premise...but one also has to know layers are friends...they are often members or the same organizations...they have to work together in other legal issues and will not want to jeopardize their relationships with other firms over a single client....and as my ex was a legal secretary...and I joined them in a few xmas parties...spring parties one hears the stories....

I went to a lawyer years ago 15ish and asked for opinions….I picked one who I knew did not get along with the firm my ex mostly represented. He gave me advice but effectively told me he could not represent me in the manner he suggested due to other considerations…suggesting I move the family away from the court jurisdiction that my ex was involved in…the court jurisdiction that she had lawyers she knew and had worked for who became Superior Court Judges.

The law does need to change...but then also one needs to be equipped and know what they can ask for...and not accept the first lawyers instructions...

I have had primary custody for almost 11yrs....my ex works under the table and has for years...i cannot prove what she earns...and if it went to court the judgment I might be able to receive...based on what she would be claiming is not worth the legal fee's i would have to invest to obtain the judgment.

I would suggest your son be far better reading and doing some legal reading before he ventures into court next time....I would suggest he use a lawyer but know a few things first about legal strategies he can ask the lawyer to explain to him....I had one lawyer ask where the other lawyers practices before he would suggest he could help.

One rule is to pick a lawyer out of a different town and different primary court house...you pay extra costs when you go to court but if they have less chance of having the legal office's having regular legal interaction with other issues you might find better representation. Of course lawyers would often suggest there is no truth to this suggestion but one can obtain advice for a few hundred dollars....and that is or can be a great tool in minimizing your long term liabilities.

And Silver hawk is right....you cannot sign away legal obligation of support....in fact...one should never agree to signing away financial lump sums on the premise they will not pursue child support......effectively the mother can take a lump sum saying she will not ask for child support and within a few months can ask the courts for a judgment for child support and it will be granted.
 Blah_User_Name
Joined: 8/27/2011
Msg: 58
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/7/2012 2:14:27 PM

Does he know that those arrears (collecting interest) will stay outstanding until the day he dies? Even if he's 95 years old?


Very probably - but what difference will that make. It's highly unlikely we will be informed of his passing, whenever that happens or where ever he happens to be.


It's very hard to get any employer at all to do "under the table" anymore, if at all. Not worth it to them.
It's very hard to be self-employed and evade the taxman for any length of time due to unreported income. Something always sets off the red flags.


Oh, I know exactly how he's doing it. As an IT professional, he can work remotely. So his GF set up a company in her name. We are not allowed to track her or her child through the school system in order to get his whereabouts. His time is invoiced to the company he provides the service to but does not specify his name on the contract, only the fact that X amount of hours of service have been provided. One company billing another. They then pay her company which provides an income to their household. Everything is in her name. Their house. Their cars. And their car insurance. And there's nothing anyone can do.

He has no income officially. He files not tax return. It's all her business income on paper. Earning from her company.
 Blah_User_Name
Joined: 8/27/2011
Msg: 59
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/7/2012 2:30:45 PM
One other thing. Because of the unjust laws, there are orgainzations and businesses that now cater to establishing new identities for individuals that feel they have no other alternative than to run away rather than pay high sums of alimony/CS for the rest of their lives. These orgainizations will find employment, provide assitance in creating new identities, and help individuals move to other countries where Canadian law or international law has no precedence......sounds like this might have happened in this case..............


Off topic but in answer to a prior posting.....

I agree but it's even simpler then that - and indeed the Family Court judge wondered this. It would not surprise me as during the process of divorce I learned that he had changed his name previously - which I was not previously aware of.

In this case, he ran up debt entertaining his GF and has not even been located by the debt collectors who have searched for him.

The Judge had a theory - It seems if you wish to change your name in this country, all that is required is to walk into any lawyers office and declare that wish. Sure, you have to produce a birth certificate to validate who you are but that's all. You pay your money and walk out with a piece of paper which states your new name and your right to use it on all official documentation.

So, with that piece of paper, he would be able to claim to have just arrived from England and apply for a nice new SIN number. As long as he doesn't identify himself with his previous name, no problem - in our case all he loses are the 10 years of CPP contributions. As he liquidated the assets when we split, he's already had all of those so it's not like he is walking away from pension plans, savings, shares etc.

With that SIN number, he can open a new bank account, get a new driving license, apply for a Health card and so on. If anything, he's in a better position then he was as building a new credit rating from nothing is far easier then moving from a position of debtors perusing you back into good stead.

The only person that can link him to his prior name (and the debtors and garnishments attached to that) is the lawyer and will no central record of name changes, the lawyers paperwork will sit in a cabinet somewhere until the time has passed for them to be able to shred it. The lawyer is under no obligation to check and see if there is anything outstanding against his prior name.

Easy. New life. New family. No repayment of his credit card debt. And no child support lurking over his shoulder. Nice and neat for those who have the skill set to work remotely and who are prepared to walk away from their children. Helps that with no extended family, he doesn't have to worry about them keeping his secret.

Wouldn't have cost him more then about $100.00 at most.

And even if he needs to use his previous qualification certification and job references (which he would have gotten on paper), all he needs to do is show his change of name deed and then the certificates in his old name and no future employers would even think to check any further - It might even be possible to write to those who issued his qualification certificates and request new ones in his new name by enclosing a copy of the change of name deed.




The system quite simply doesn't work for many. No system is ever going to work for everyone but as it stands, it only works for those parents who are reasonable i.e. Those parents who are understand that they are both responsible for the costs of raising their children - those who would have figured something out anyway.
 Silverhawk_tkn
Joined: 12/3/2010
Msg: 60
view profile
History
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/7/2012 3:33:28 PM

I think these organizations that you speak of will charge a heckuva lot of money to do this for a person. Not very many deadbeat dads can afford something like that...or leave a place of great employment wages because they don't want to pay for their children. So, I feel that is a very rare option for man to take to evade CS.



I agree for the most part as well. However, I do like the whole Kenneth****e story. As a successful plastic surgeon, he payed his ex millions in Alimony and C.S. She asked for more. He refused. The courts imputed a ridiculous sum of money he had to continue to pay, so he moved his entire practice to the Bahamas, where Canadian law has no jurisdiction. She ended up getting nothing more, although she did get millions prior to that.......

He'll be instantly arrested if he comes back to Canada, but I'm sure he won't set foot here any time soon......lol......
 Bell30655
Joined: 8/17/2009
Msg: 61
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/7/2012 6:15:51 PM
Mental note to self... Don't date Canadian women with children.
 SweetLilGTP
Joined: 10/22/2010
Msg: 62
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/7/2012 7:07:51 PM

so if your gonna go in and co-habitate with a woman who already has kids..put your money where your mouth is instead of worrying where their mother's mouth is gonna be every night by moving in!


I agree.

If you're not prepared to man up to that extent; just stay fwb at her leisure.

NO shame in that.
 kcomfort0001
Joined: 12/22/2010
Msg: 63
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/8/2012 11:19:47 PM
The whole child support system is a scam.

I pay child support regularly never behind even ahead, plus paid support in other ways that got called "gifts" which they were not, and I never got credit for any of it example, made sure ex had a car to transport daughter etc..etc..

I don't have any rights to the child, as I was much younger at the time and immature, but basically got alot of this all set by default, can't get an attorney in the state of texas to even call me back on this issue. And no attorney in my state can represent me about visitation because they aren't in the state of texas.

Meanwhile if I do call the AG's office for anything I'm spoken down to like I'm a criminal. I think only one person there has ever treated me with any sort of respect.

In the US guys are obligated to support non-biological children, but luckily this situation hit the wallet of a Judge in Texas who is currently fighting it and he should.. BIOLOGICAL fathers should be responsible for their children, sure non-biological children deserve support too but I don't see why a guy who isn't the biological father should even be forced to pay.. maybe offer health insurance etc.etc.. as it would be cheaper for the state then welfare would be but that's a very minimal cost..

At least in my case child support = Mommy support. And I'd still get phone calls asking for more money, my response is you should have thought about that prior to not giving me credit for the car I purchased, the income taxes I've sent etc..etc. She's one of these ladies that constantly play the single mother card.
 Blah_User_Name
Joined: 8/27/2011
Msg: 64
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/9/2012 1:56:01 PM
Don't forget the rules apply regardless of gender - so all those single fathers who have shared or full custody, should also be avoided by women who may or may not have their own children but whose income level is means she is contributing to the family costs. Just evening out the thinking here - it's not only non-biological Dad's this rule applies to.

Maybe we should just put all single parents on an island by themselves - like a leprosy colony which they cannot leave until such a time their children reach 18 ? Doesn't really matter if they've already been screwed over, are working their a$$es off and doing it alone, the simple fact that they dared to commit to a relationship previously, have stepped us as parents, and have taken on their responsibilities, should all be ignored and they should all be declared undate-able just to protect everyone else. Once they all become a sounder investment emotionally and less of a financial risk, they can be allowed to be part of the mainstream.

After all, surely if the system doesn't work, rather then do something to try and fix it, it's far easier to penalise those who it already negatively affects. Might as well kick them whilst they're down.
 Silverhawk_tkn
Joined: 12/3/2010
Msg: 65
view profile
History
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/9/2012 3:20:16 PM

Maybe we should just put all single parents on an island by themselves - like a leprosy colony which they cannot leave until such a time their children reach 18 ? Doesn't really matter if they've already been screwed over, are working their a$$es off and doing it alone, the simple fact that they dared to commit to a relationship previously, have stepped us as parents, and have taken on their responsibilities, should all be ignored and they should all be declared undate-able just to protect everyone else. Once they all become a sounder investment emotionally and less of a financial risk, they can be allowed to be part of the mainstream.



In essence, isn't that what we are doing by avoiding co-habitation? Socially, it does make for an interesting scenario. More and more people are living single in their own little Utopian islands. I don't look at it necessarily as negative, and I certainly don't see single parents as undateable. You just have to adjust to the rules and play accordingly. What is so wrong with living separate? Like you said, the rule is gender neutral. Living separate may be more expensive up front, but it still beats having to potentially pay loads of child support for decades to someone you no longer have any ties to.........

I most certainly agree that these laws are socially destroying the traditional family. However, like I said above, there is simply far too much money at stake for government and the legal industry to budge. In my mind, its not worth it to fix. Much easier to understand and avoid a bad situation and live within the rules.


Don't live with a woman who has kids that you will be a second parental figure too if you cannot follow through for the long haul....It is okay to live seperate and have boundaries.
Finacial reason's should not be the catalyst for that decision...The kids and their emotional well being and feeling of stability and security should be the #1 reason....



Fair enough. To that point, I do NOT want to become a second parental figure to my GF's kids, and I don't expect her to be a parent to mine. My ex is a fine mother to my son, and her ex is a fine father to her kids - they don't need step parents.

I intend to have an "arms length" relationship with her kids which should hopefully avoid the "in-loco-parentis" label. This kind of relationship, combined with no co-habitation, will avoid any financial litigation in the event me and my GF don't work out long term. I know it sounds ridiculously "businesslike", but without these "precautions", the business that happens when things fall apart would be far, far worse...........
 Silverhawk_tkn
Joined: 12/3/2010
Msg: 66
view profile
History
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/9/2012 3:46:30 PM
One thing I find very obvious in these posts is the bitterness and self-entitled attitude coming from adults...


.....on the flip side, I love how women think that the financial losses most guys go through when split-ups occurs is no worse than losing a pack of gum out of our pockets, and then hide behind "its all about the kids". Thats pure BS!!

Some of us (most of us) lost our houses, savings, and are bound to paying for years to come, sometimes with no end in sight. Tell me Liz, would you be so eager to get involved with someone knowing you could lose your personal belongings after years and years of work and have to pay for even more years even though you only knew this person for a year? Maybe even less? Who would be so foolish?

....a fool and his money are soon parted..........
 SweetLilGTP
Joined: 10/22/2010
Msg: 67
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/9/2012 5:23:42 PM
One thing I find very obvious in these posts is the bitterness and self-entitled attitude coming from adults...and nobody has expressed the opinions of how the kid might feel.


And there's your inconvenient truth.

The majority actually doesn't give a sh*t; other than to say a few PC words.

We're a very selfish society


Tell me Liz, would you be so eager to get involved with someone knowing you could lose your personal belongings after years and years of work and have to pay for even more years even though you only knew this person for a year? Maybe even less? Who would be so foolish?


Everyone; until it becomes existant as possible, or the way it is in "their" reality.
 cariboolady1
Joined: 3/22/2012
Msg: 68
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/10/2012 1:38:48 AM
My goodness! Did something I said hit close to the chest, cind?
The condescending vitriol that you spewed certainly brought that thought racing towards me like a bolt in the sky!
Anyways, my little granddaughter adores me as I do her. Yes, she calls me gramma.

If you cared to read very carefully to what I had said before this (rinse and repeat) ~
1. The mother has REALIZED the moral aspect of what she did to her daughter was criminal and rescinded her decision.
2. The mother REFUSES child support from the real bio father. Her reason? "sniff...It was too embarassing..".
Ohh, go back and read why it was embarrassing. Good reason to slam the door in his face? Make another man who was a b/f pay? NOPE!
These are people's lives that are forever changed because they decided to briefly co-habitate with a single mother.
Just accept that it stinks for single mothers out there because of this. Go and pound the door of your local politician/senator instead of pounding me.
3. There are two separate laws in Canada with regards to children in a divorce or separation. One is Provincial and the other Federal. One is to do with CS and the other is to do with access. The real bio dad SHOULD be paying for his child. End of story. There is no reason WHY he shouldn't unless he is in jail. If he chooses to visit or not to visit, then that is access. NOTHING to do with CS.
Since the bio dad was forced out of the picture, my son would've willingly picked up the slack with the access law.
My son felt very badly about this little girl when the split-up happened. She was torn from her real father...door SHUT! She was going to be torn from my son if he didn't pay up for her.
The mother broke her promise because she was involved with someone else now. My son stood on principle and the mother pulled her card. SHE was the one that HURT that little girl with her actions.

Thank God...All is fine now. They have agreed on equal time, two homes and equal expenditure. There is no CS paid for both girls now...as we speak.
As for expenditure from me and my son's family for this little girl? This little girl lacks for nothing at my son's home. The mother knows that. She knows that this side of the family is very generous and there are lots of opportunities for the little girls that the mother cannot provide...that we can.

I still am working on the idea of the mother going after the real father for CS because it will be something that will come up in ten or more years, when the little girl starts to look for the real dad...as they always do.
He will fill in the blanks nicely for her...the rest of the story. It will make her feel somewhat better if she did know that he did contribute to her upbringing...even if he wasn't in the picture. It shows some measure of care.
In my son's case? She will see by then that he didn't have to take her on. It will show her how much he/we cared for her. She is in every way my little bio granddaughter and my son's daughter.

I know this..because...you see....I was a stepchild, too. I never saw my father again since he disappeared when I was six years old. He didn't contribute a penny to us three kids...but his family in Ont. did. It made me feel that someone cared.
My stepfather resented raising us. Hated putting food on the table for another man's "git". It was living in a small piece of Hell growing up and feeling unloved.

With children, love and having a family that cares is all that matters.
Morally? The CS should come from the bio father first and foremost. Letting him off the hook for stupid reasons is just incomprehensible.

Of note, cind..Give me some VALID reasons WHY a mother can skip getting CS from a bio father? What are the ways that he can be let off the hook financially while he sows his wild oats and makes babies from here to Timbuktu?
There are two people here who say that there's lots. What are some? Just curious.
 Blah_User_Name
Joined: 8/27/2011
Msg: 69
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/10/2012 3:08:12 AM
One which I can think of is court agreed - Divorce negotiations.

The Divorce process here is such that it is encouraged that all elements (parenting agreement, division of debt/assets etc) are discussed and agreed in advance, as much as possible, between the spouses before getting to Court. The idea is this encourages the parents to have control over what is in the best interests of the child rather then a Judge having to decide everything. Mediation, lawyers negotiating, are all aimed at getting to the court date with as much already agreed as possible and the Judge just having to rule on areas where agreement could not be reached plus overlooking what they are proposing for fairness and legality.

It is often times agreed that the parent with Primary care should remain in the matrimonial house in order that children can remain in the schools with their friends and within the community that they know.

Although CS here is based on a table amount, there are times where the parents will agree that instead of child support, the house will be signed over to the custodial parent and CS will be waivered (or greatly reduced) to balance out the positive equity which is gained from the home.

If this is the proposed agreement, it does require a Judge to agree to that. If the Judge considers it unfair for either party, then he can over-rule their proposal. Things which would be considered before agreeing to that are the value of positive equity and whether it is comparable to the amount of support which would be paid for the period of time support would be given - and if the custodial parent had an income sufficient to cover the costs of raising children without that monthly contribution from the ex-spouse. This is more likely to be agreed if the children are older - i.e. only a few years of support before reaching the age of majority. For very small children, this is normally dismissed as an unreasonable option.

Another one is where the non-custodial parent is in another country. Although there are agreements between certain countries, where child support can be enforced when one parent lives abroad, this is not the case in all countries.
 Blah_User_Name
Joined: 8/27/2011
Msg: 70
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/12/2012 6:59:17 AM

I don´t know a single case in Canada where a woman has been applied the loco parentis principle. Just men are paying.


I do. Single Dad. He wasn't in a relationship with the lady when they became pregnant, she didn't want a child, he did. So he raised his son from the day he was born. The bio mother wanted nothing to do with it.

He later met a married a lovely woman from New Brunswick, and she moved into his home so the boy could remain in the school he knows. The child was about 10 then. The Dad works, the step Mom works. They rented her house out. The rental from her house covered her mortgage and was put in both their names as an income property. Her name was added to his mortgage too. His house was larger and had a larger mortgage. Her house, then rental income was almost paid off when they got married (she had doubled up her mortgage payments from day one and also would drop an lump sum off the mortgage annually). As the Dad was self-employed and the step mother wasn't, she added both her husband and the child to her health insurance from work.

She went to parents evening,sat and did homework with the child, went to the school when called to get him because he was ill, all the usual things parents do. Normal family, normal couple, normal life.

Four years later, he had an affair whilst she was away at a conference and the married crumbled. She pays child support of just over $730 per month - based on her income level.

They lived about 10 houses away from me. The Dad and his son remain in the house.
 Blah_User_Name
Joined: 8/27/2011
Msg: 71
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/12/2012 7:40:32 AM

The bio mother wanted nothing to do with it.


Just to clarify *it* being the situation and parenthood not a reference to the child himself..
 Tealwood
Joined: 12/16/2008
Msg: 72
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/12/2012 1:07:36 PM

I don´t know a single case in Canada where a woman has been applied the loco parentis principle. Just men are paying.
In the US, only in the State of New York, there was only one case where the issue was discussed after separation of lesbian couple and there was not court ordered payment of child support. I can not find info of the appeal process.

Feel free to correct me if I´m wrong: only men have to pay for being involved with mothers, not the other way around.


There was one case in New Brunswick where the father tried to have the step-mother liable for child support but was unsuccessful.

We also must consider the reality of how few custodial fathers even ask the biological mother for cs....so the numbers of custodial fathers asking a non biological mother would really be insignificant.....as it seems the men are just more likely to stand on their own two feet?

The other reality is the often used barometer for determining assuming the parental role is the financial contribution of the step father....again look at the standard employment statistics in respect to full time employment versus those most likely to be no working or working part time....how can the average part time woman be expected to be paying cs?

How can they be deemed assuming a parental role of assuming responsibility when they are the ones most likely recipients of the other parents financial efforts?
 NoCretinZone
Joined: 4/12/2012
Msg: 73
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/12/2012 5:13:22 PM
A DNA test won't matter, the courts will look at the incomes of both fathers, and your boy friend will have to make up the difference on the tables if he is the higher income, or the bio father will. Either way in Canada, after a year of living and acting as a parent, he would be financially responsible. Since he already pays more then he needs to for his other child, it shouldn't be any trouble to pay what he should for both of his children. So now that he isn't biologically her father he doesn't want to be her father? A father supports his children, end of story. And If she is always included in all family gatherings, then she will see that her mother is not telling the truth about him disowning her, legally if it goes to court he will have to pay, and a judge won't think to highly of a father who tries to get out of his financial responsibility to his child. You can waste time and money trying to mess up this girl more than her mother already has with this whole issue, or your boyfriend can man up, check the tables for your province to see what he has to pay for two children based on his income, and pay it.
 cariboolady1
Joined: 3/22/2012
Msg: 74
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/12/2012 9:37:24 PM
Yes. A father supports his children. There are lots that are allowed to skip out and make others pay up instead. Even making ST boyfriends who were temporarily in the picture to pay up.

It's got to do with common sense...and going back to square one. If the bio dad is made to "man-up" in the first place, never mind what "mommy" wants, alot of this would be redundant.
If mommy "chooses" to have her baby and bio-dad wanted to have an abortion, tough luck, bio dad! You should have made sure you were protected when you wanted in her pants! Now, you have a responsibility. As, what another poster said. "Man-up!!"
As for the "mommy" who doesn't go after bio daddy for CS because she chose to have the baby when he didn't want it, but decides to go after a short term b/f who was nice to her child, then, SHAME on you! This kind of thing has to stop.

This mother who is the mother of my son's girls has a history of Short Term relationships and in each she is always looking for a new "baby daddy". (She has unresolved issues from childhood. It was basically a horror story.)
I have heard that this (looking for a new baby daddy) is quite common and I actually witnessed it for real. Just go to Family Court for 1 whole day. It blows the mind what does go on as far as "who's who in the zoo" with regards to "Who's the Daddy of the Month?"!!!
What is worse is that the Welfare social worker will get a court order done up for the "flavour of the month" to pay CS even if he's only been with her for six months to a year! I saw this!
If the courts keep up what they are doing, with some of these women's track records, she will be getting support from at least 10 men by the time her child is twenty!

My son didn't have to take on the responsibilty of the non-bio child and be her father. He could've walked away....like so many BIO dads do, but he chose not to. It upsets him that her real dad has willingly stepped out of the picture. How could a father do this?
As for EVER walking away from his bio daughter, he would put himself through torture (hell and back) before he would ever consider letting another man be her dad.
He spends quality AND quantity time with them and spends a goodly amount of money on food, clothing and extras for them. They want for nothing and absolutely adore him.
That is a man. A very responsible man.
How many bio dads do that? How many ST non-bio temporary father figures who come and go have done this?

Such a sad situation today, the family unit is just about dead in the water. Going to Family Court for one day was witnessing so many tragic circumstances. I don't know how many times the judge would ask "Who's in the picture right now?"

My son's only beef? Only on principle, mind you. Was having a court order/demand that he pay CS for a non bio child for almost twenty years when he was only with the mother for 2 years total. Especially when the mother didn't want the child to know that she had a real bio dad living right under her nose and he was willing to pay CS....and SHE refused it.
 Tealwood
Joined: 12/16/2008
Msg: 75
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/12/2012 10:13:00 PM

A DNA test won't matter, the courts will look at the incomes of both fathers, and your boy friend will have to make up the difference on the tables if he is the higher income


says who?
Show ALL Forums  > Single Parents  > paying child support for non-biological children