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
 Blah_User_Name
Joined: 8/27/2011
Msg: 59
paying child support for non-biological childrenPage 4 of 5    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
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?
 Blackout478
Joined: 5/1/2011
Msg: 76
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/26/2012 11:21:26 AM
I been in a situation like this and I was listed as father on birth certificate, ended up as not my child so I didn't have to continue paying child support.
 QueenBeeSweetness
Joined: 9/23/2011
Msg: 77
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/26/2012 10:25:48 PM

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


Why is MOMMY in quotes? Are you suggesting that the women you speak of, are not "real mommies? Are they faux mommies?


f 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!!"


Shame on those awful, terrible women for owing uterus's, & thus having reproductive choices.


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!


Well, your darling son DID choose to sleep with & be in relations with this woman. Soooo,,,,,,yeah.......lol.
The way you go off on the woman was your sons choice & that he loved, suggests you may have some unresolved issues.


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?


If he CHOSE to be a father to the girl, why does he need pats on the back for doing what parents do? he chose to be a parent, even if hot biologically, it was his choice. You dont get applause for doing for your kids. it is what a normal, loving parent does, weather biological or adopted out of love.
 mrcs84
Joined: 12/9/2008
Msg: 78
view profile
History
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/26/2012 10:55:50 PM

If he CHOSE to be a father to the girl, why does he need pats on the back for doing what parents do?

Probably because he has zero obligations to that child one way or the other. He's doing something quite charitable, and it can possibly have a butterfly effect depending on how well he does contributing to the raising of that child. Some of us can see past our own noses and acknowledge that it's not the same as when the child belongs to you. I've yet to meet a step child who marginalized what their step parents have done for them in the same fashion that you have.





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!


Well, your darling son DID choose to sleep with & be in relations with this woman. Soooo,,,,,,yeah.......lol.


It's nice to see that you have zero remorse for his struggles. Heaven forbid he makes a bad relationship choice. He didn't even sire the child, he just dated the woman. So because of which, he is liable for child support, and you're apparently okay with this. And people wonder why so many single mothers have such a hard time finding a guy that will stick with her beyond casual sex.
 QueenBeeSweetness
Joined: 9/23/2011
Msg: 79
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/26/2012 11:25:57 PM

Probably because he has zero obligations to that child one way or the other. He's doing something quite charitable, and it can possibly have a butterfly effect depending on how well he does contributing to the raising of that child. Some of us can see past our own noses and acknowledge that it's not the same as when the child belongs to you. I've yet to meet a step child who marginalized what their step parents have done for them in the same fashion that you have.



If he chose to be her father, that right there is a parental obligation. If he is parenting the child out of charity rather than a genuine love, he should rethink his choices to be involved with children. My children have had 2 step-fathers. One was a step-dad to one of my kids & a bio-dad to my other kid, should he have only been patted on the back for the kid that wasnt his biologically? Nah, he didnt care much for pats on the back, that wasnt his driving motive in becoming a father. He did it because he wanted to, didnt ask for anything but love in return.


It's nice to see that you have zero remorse for his struggles. Heaven forbid he makes a bad relationship choice. He didn't even sire the child, he just dated the woman. So because of which, he is liable for child support, and you're apparently okay with this. And people wonder why so many single mothers have such a hard time finding a guy that will stick with her beyond casual sex.


Oh please, almost every single woman wth kids who posts here gets berated for bad relationship choices. People make them, I have made them, it's life. Own it., dont whine about it. I dont care about his child support, those are his troubles, not mine. Apparently he did more than just casually date the woman if he was acting as a father to her child. Thats called being a family, not dating.


And people wonder why so many single mothers have such a hard time finding a guy that will stick with her beyond casual sex.


Oh please, where did i say that? Not true at all. I was a single parent at 19 & by 23 had a rock on my finger.
Many single parents go on to marry or re-marry or be in relationships, while single dudes living at their Mama's house bray on about them only being good for a quickie. If they want casual sex? More power to them, but it certainly isnt all they can get.
 mrcs84
Joined: 12/9/2008
Msg: 80
view profile
History
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/27/2012 12:26:55 AM
If he is parenting the child out of charity rather than a genuine love, he should rethink his choices to be involved with children.

Many guys take on these responsibilities because it's "the right thing to do," and even the so called genuine love has to develop over time.


Nah, he didnt care much for pats on the back, that wasnt his driving motive in becoming a father.

Small Sample Fallacy

It's just a figure of speech. Moreover, it's not so much whether they want recognition or not, but just whether they are deserving of one. It's kind of like our active/retired military. They are very deserving of recognition, but most of them aren't pandering for it.



Oh please, almost every single woman wth kids who posts here gets berated for bad relationship choices.

Having children is a big lifestyle choice. One that shouldn't be taken lightly. No person should be financially responsible for investing time in taking care of children that aren't even theirs. Hell, why don't we just sue babysitters, camp councilors, and teachers for child support too?


Thats called being a family, not dating.

They most certainly are not a family when the relationship falls apart. There is no sensible reason why he should be forced to maintain financial ties.



Oh please, where did i say that?

I didn't say YOU. One day you will be able to process that I'm not necessarily talking about YOU.


Not true at all. I was a single parent at 19 & by 23 had a rock on my finger.

Again, Small Sample Fallacy

Just look at these "dating single mother" forums.
http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts14751271.aspx
http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts11570879.aspx
http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts1985914.aspx
http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts14578535.aspx
http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts2205651.aspx
http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts13699243.aspx
http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts13619711.aspx
http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts6541026.aspx

That's just -part- of a thread search for "single mothers." You put in "single moms" and find plenty more. Not to mention all of the threads that get deleted because the topic of dating them has been done to death, but you can keep your head in the sand if you want to.


while single dudes living at their Mama's house bray on about them only being good for a quickie.

I guess we are going to just ignore how many of these single mothers have to live with their parents because they decided to go to get their educations and careers started AFTER they had kids. But let me guess, because YOU managed to make it work, YOU speak for all other single mothers.
 SxCBriGiT
Joined: 9/28/2008
Msg: 81
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/27/2012 6:49:45 AM
Unfortunately.If the child was born during the marriage regardless of if the child is biologically his or not the courts consider it a child of marriage and he is responsible for the child anyways. I don't feel its fair, but it happens all the time with married women cheating.
 mrcs84
Joined: 12/9/2008
Msg: 82
view profile
History
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 5/30/2012 1:06:30 AM

There are morals and obligations surrounding kids that adults make the decision to be there for that are very much black and white...

Sure...but once those ties are severed, they should not be liable for the kid anymore, especially seeing how it's NOT BIOLOGICALLY THEIR KID.


than obviously you have acted as a parent (parentis loco) for a long period of time.

That "long period of time" can be as little as 6 months. Moreover, if there is this financial obligation, then they should also be granted visitation rights, which they are not.



I cannot even imagine walking away from such an awesome responsibility

Throwing your money at the parent of a kid that isn't even yours without your discretion isn't exactly an "awesome responsibility."
Not having control over how that money is spent on the kid (if it's even being spent on the kid at all) isn't an "awesome responsibility."

I would get more pleasure out of just flushing my money down the toilet.


Back to your corner you lil troll...or band together with the other haters of single mom's to lobby legislation that will illustrate you very outdated and predjiduce opinions.....good luck....and stfu...back to your corner

One day you'll grow up enough to actually know how to have a decent contribution to a discussion.
 nubeginnings64
Joined: 4/8/2012
Msg: 83
paying child support for non-biological children
Posted: 6/1/2012 7:55:25 AM
Wait for the paternity test results. If he's not the father, go to court & stop all forced child support. Anything done (visitation) or given (financially) thereafter will be out of the generosity of his heart. The girl's 13 & will figure things out on her own very soon & even seek him out if the mom puts a stop to visits. Heartbreaking for him yes but will resolve itself after a little time.
Show ALL Forums  > Single Parents  > paying child support for non-biological children