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  > Relationships  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 starfun77
Joined: 11/3/2007
Msg: 81
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!Page 2 of 33    (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, 31, 32, 33)
Wow.. weezygirl

some dads are excellent...but i find most aren't and that's speaking from experience not heresay


What a load of B/S. Honey, its the other way round. Most dads are excellent. Its most of us women that are just plain spiteful and revengeful (including you and me)! Speaking from experience!!! Hun..how many men have you married to "get this experience"?


,...you haven't even had any children

Well answered by "That Guy Him" ...
I don't have to be a soldier to know there's a war going on in Afghanistan.
 scorpiomover
Joined: 4/19/2007
Msg: 83
view profile
History
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 12/31/2007 10:42:18 PM
Oscat, I suggest that you talk to a laywer, not just on HOW MUCH money your friend would have to pay in child support, but HOW THE MONEY IS USED. It appears that this issue is glossed over, but Wikipedia claims that:
In the United States, 10 states (Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Indiana, Louisiana, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oregon, and Washington) allow courts to demand an accounting on expenses and spending from custodial parents. Additionally, Alabama courts have authorized such accounting under certain specific circumstances.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_support

While Wikipedia is not a site that claims to be perfectly accurate, it does appear that this is an issue that can be raised. In other states, the courts simply don't want to get involved, and say it is up to the mother (assuming she has the kids) on how the money is used. But unless there is a specific statute that states that the mother can use the money on anything, even on herself, it would mean that the matter is open to agreement between the 2 parties.

That could mean that a written agreement, prior to the marriage, could stipulate how the money should be spent, and that the mother agrees to keep all receipts for purchases over $5, and you get given receipts for most things nowadays anyway, so this should not be a problem, and that she agrees to have her spending audited, at the expense of the father (assuming that he's paying for them).

Even if the courts and/or her lawyer want to challenge this, he has a very good case. Child support in Canada is covered by the Federal Child Support Guidelines, which are put in place to follow the following Objectives:
1. The objectives of these Guidelines are
(a) to establish a fair standard of support for children that ensures that they continue to benefit from the financial means of both spouses after separation;
(b) to reduce conflict and tension between spouses by making the calculation of child support orders more objective;
(c) to improve the efficiency of the legal process by giving courts and spouses guidance in setting the levels of child support orders and encouraging settlement; and
(d) to ensure consistent treatment of spouses and children who are in similar circumstances.
http://www.canlii.com/ca/regu/sor97-175/sec1.html

I refer you to:
Reducing Conflict Over Child Support
Reduce the Hostility over Money
...
Understand that the residential parent has some base costs for housing, electricity, etc., that must be paid even if the child spends time with the non-residential parent.
...
If you are on the receiving end of the payments, it is helpful to provide a simple accounting of how the support money is spent on a quarterly basis. This is not to say that you need to submit a detailed down to the last penny accounting of the support payment, but you can do a lot to demonstrate to the paying parent that the money is being used for the child or children rather than for yourself.
...
If the support check does not arrive, don't use this as an excuse to deny visitation. Your anger and resentment are understandable, but using your child as a tool to punish the other parent is also unacceptable. Denying visitation punishes the child more than the other parent, and can bring about further court action.
...
Share money limitations with your children but not your anxiety and worry. Kids need to understand why they can't eat out as often, but they don't need to share your stress.
...
Don't try to assuage guilt by spending money, buying presents, and otherwise indulging your child to make up for the divorce or the time you are away from each other. Also, don't give your child things that you know the other parent can't afford. Playing the part of a "Disneyland Dad" or a "Merry Mom" not only encourages a child to build unrealistic expectations, but also can lead to manipulative behavior. Playing one parent off against the other is not a positive situation for the parents or the child. If there is something special that your child would like to have, plan with your co-parent about how or whether that particular purchase can be made. Sometimes proportional sharing of the costs is a fair way to provide for special needs or wants.
...
The paying parent may want to pay for some expenses directly rather than pass the money through the other parent. This sometimes helps remove some of the distrust about money and helps overcome the feeling that the money is being used by the other parent for his or her personal benefit. Make sure that the other parent is agreeable to this and that he or she understands and agrees with any such change in normal child support procedures in writing.
http://ohioline.osu.edu/flm99/fs12.html

As you can see, there is a good case to be made that such a written agreement would be upheld by the court, as it would achieve the objectives of the Federal Child Support Guidelines.

I also refer you to the following parts of the Federal Child Support Guidelines, which may be of use:
7. (1) In a child support order the court may, on either spouse’s request, provide for an amount to cover all or any portion of the following expenses, which expenses may be estimated, taking into account the necessity of the expense in relation to the child’s best interests and the reasonableness of the expense in relation to the means of the spouses and those of the child and to the family’s spending pattern prior to the separation:
(3) In determining the amount of an expense referred to in subsection (1), the court must take into account any subsidies, benefits or income tax deductions or credits relating to the expense, and any eligibility to claim a subsidy, benefit or income tax deduction or credit relating to the expense.
...
13. A child support order must include the following information:
(e) the particulars of any expense described in subsection 7(1), the child to whom the expense relates, and the amount of the expense or, where that amount cannot be determined, the proportion to be paid in relation to the expense; and
...
19. (1) The court may impute such amount of income to a spouse as it considers appropriate in the circumstances, which circumstances include the following:
(a) the spouse is intentionally under-employed or unemployed, other than where the under-employment or unemployment is required by the needs of a child of the marriage or any child under the age of majority or by the reasonable educational or health needs of the spouse;
http://www.canlii.com/ca/regu/sor97-175/

I'm guessing here, but it sounds to me that:
Section 7 (3) could be used to make a case that the father would be entitled to pay less if any of the children are eligible for a scholarship.
Section 13 (e) could be used to make a case that the mother would have to account for any unusually large purchases.
Section 19 (1) (a) could be used to make a case that if she is a stay-at-home mom, then the father would only have to pay for reasonable usage of the consumption of food, utilities bills, and car costs for the mother, and she might have to provide some proof that she is at home looking after them. If he suspects that she is going out and leaving the children on their own, he could hire a Private Investigator, and show that she is not entitled to any money that might be used to support herself.
Section 19 (1) (a) could also be used to make a case that if the kids are in school, then she has to get herself a quality-paying job, and it will not be acceptable for her to work as a cashier in a supermarket, unless she hasn't got a High School Diploma. But even then, he can make a case that she can get a GED, and get a good-paying job.

It seems to me that Canadian Law has left enough loopholes open for a good lawyer to make sure that all of the money goes on the kids, that she only spends a reasonable amount of money on them, and that the rest goes for schools, and for a trust fund for college. That would have to be negotiated in a combination of the pre-nup and a court case, when the child support payments are decided. But there is a lot of room to work with. Enough to ensure that although he might pay a lot, that it goes on the kids, and in the right ways. He can even pay some of it direct, like making rent/mortage payments direct to the landlord/bank, paying the school fees to the school, and asking for the medical expenses to be billed to him directly.
A good mother will appreciate that a significant part of the financial burden is taken off her hands. A bad one will have no room to manoeuvre.

Also, in order to avoid the problem of if they choose to get married in a church, and they object to the pre-nup, might I suggest that the pre-nup does not discuss divorce, but rather financial arrangements that would apply to any period from the wedding onwards, including the marriage? That way, any limits on the alimony would also put restrictions on her spending too much within the marriage, and over-spending on the kids too, with a restriction that he can make a "gift" to her, such as jewellery or the like, if it would be welcomed and appreciated.

I'm not sure if any of this would help. But if it does, then great. If not, at least you checked out the possibility.
 ItsMargo
Joined: 4/24/2007
Msg: 85
view profile
History
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/1/2008 12:37:18 AM

If the Pre-Nup determines that he will remain primary caregiver of the children, the whole concern of him being bent over backwards for child support will no longer be an issue.

Not possible to do, and no decent lawyer would allow it. The children are not born yet, the parenting skills and involvement hasn't been demonstrated yet... therefore it is impossible to determine at this point what the best interests of the child would be. That's the goal the judiciary will attempt to balance if, as you remind us, these not yet married people do actually marry, have children and divorce.

Although it can't be formally agreed to now, discussions are very useful to get a sense for your partner. It has been my experience, and a number of other people who have posted in this thread... that who people are on the way in is not who you are dealing with on the way out. Pre-nups are useful... but you can't predetermine issues related to children.
 GrandmaBooBoo
Joined: 12/30/2006
Msg: 86
view profile
History
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/1/2008 5:04:57 AM

I told him that in North America (unlike United Kingdom), there is no maximum child support hence people pay as much as $5000/month for one child depending on their income.
Anyway does this make any sense? What normal child needs $5000/month? I read of a dad who paid such ridiculous amounts (average of $6250) for 13 years and therefore felt justified not leaving anything for this kid in his will. He had 3 other kids, btw!
I have no idea what the laws are in Canada or England, BUT in the USA.....which is, by the way part of North America; Child Support is calculated NOT by what "a normal child NEEDS", but by the kind of LIFESTYLE the child would have had if the marriage had stayed in tact.

What bothers me is NOT that the man is attempting to do some "pre-planning", but that I see an attitude of.....buying and selling ...CHILDREN. How much are they WORTH? I have absolutely NOTHING against pre-nuptial agreements, in fact...they're the smart thing to do.....particularly if one's income far exceeds the other's. HOWEVER, in such cases, I have to say that children are best left OUT of such business arrangements all together. Meaning....HAVE NONE! Children need stability.....not "planned failures"...no matter how orderly, logical and legally they're done.
 starfun77
Joined: 11/3/2007
Msg: 88
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/1/2008 7:05:02 AM
Bluesunshine: Yes you are in the minority! And I respect you for that.

So, Star.....where do you get your stats anyway???????

..same place as Weezygirl got hers.
Interestingly, you didnt comments on hers..or was it because you agree with her view that most men are inherently useless!
 starfun77
Joined: 11/3/2007
Msg: 92
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/1/2008 8:39:32 AM
BLue sunshine: Well, I am NOT an advocate for men (ironically). I am instead an ADVOCATE for fairness! I am also talking from experience...Where a greedy mother takes a dad for all he has...to the point that the dad deems it better to abandon the children.
I know "unfairness" and bitterness when i see it a mile away! Men (99%) would love to have a good relationship with their kids after breakup...and most do if the woman acts reasonable.

My dad sent me and my brother cards for every occassion, mum never gave them to us. She was all about getting money from him...even when I moved out of home (16) to live with my dad's brother, she was still collecting from him. He is the kind that gave everything he had for us and mum lived off it. I was made to believe that he is bad.
DADS are inherently good people. ..else women wont have kids with them in the first place.
 starfun77
Joined: 11/3/2007
Msg: 95
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/1/2008 8:59:41 AM

That's not a good enough reason to abandon your children..........

..by abandonment I meant not having a real relationship with him. He stopped coming to see us because everytime he came, mum had something to argue about with him. He didnt like that happening in front of us. We even found out recently that he voluntarily paid extra CS so mum could send us over to him (mum moved 5 hours away from him)for weekends, hoilidays etc but she refused, yet collected the money. We were always so excited to see him and that made mum angry.

He had 2 other kids and they are so different from us. Positively I mean. Everybody who knows my dad tells us how much we have missed. And do you think the courts can or will punish mum for taking so much away from us? No!
And yes, I have heard horror stories from both sides but the majority is similar to mine. Hence my conclusion.
 Canonista
Joined: 12/5/2007
Msg: 96
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/1/2008 9:04:06 AM
In my state (Michigan) the courts will recognize any contractual agreements made by both parties.

All they see it as is less work for them.
 handsm5
Joined: 12/3/2007
Msg: 97
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/1/2008 9:18:31 AM
...I was thinking each State has it's own 'system' it can adopt / follow etc and I'm sure (they all) change depending on the elected officials etc at a certain time.
I DO know, here in dumpwater PA :) - a man & woman (aka the mother & father of a child) can 'agree' to a set rate of child support for a child / children howEVER - even if both sides have attorneys working / signing the agreement(s), the custodial parent can STILL 'go back' for the difference from the court order vs the agreement (between the mother and father!)
I know this sounds...********* but (this) IS how it was just some 5 yrs ago! Sick but true. So I would be sure to check EVERYTHING involved with ANY 'agreement' with appliable State laws.
 GrandmaBooBoo
Joined: 12/30/2006
Msg: 99
view profile
History
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/1/2008 2:37:04 PM

What a load of B/S. Honey, its the other way round. Most dads are excellent. Its most of us women that are just plain spiteful and revengeful (including you and me)! Speaking from experience!!! Hun..how many men have you married to "get this experience"?
Please leave ME out of your category....HONEY, cause I raised my own two with no child support, plus a couple of other mens children....with NO support from the absentee mothers....and now, I'm raising 2 grandchildren...with NO support from the father. Let's see....my mother also raised me with NO SUPPORT from my father. Need I continue?

Now, granted, more fathers are hanging around these days than did when I divorced in 1978. At that time the statistics showed that less than 20% (2 out of 10) fathers continued to pay support for more than 3 years after the divorce. Hence my strong advise to my own daughters.....BEFORE you have a child....BE SURE that YOU...and you ALONE are capable of supporting that (those children) BEFORE you have them. The stupidest thing in the world a women has ever done is to rely on someone else for her own survival....much less that of her children. If the guy sticks around....fine, I believe strongly that children are much better off with 2 parents; BUT, they're far too precious to leave their well being left up to the whims of anyone....whether they be male or female, who's too selfish and irresponsible to put them first.


Here is an idea,,Get yourself a JOB. Not just 40 hours a week but lets go for 100 hours or more per week and then you will be contributing instead of complaining
Been there, DONE that Southernguy. So WHY are the men still whining that I've been able to retire with a nice income and they're still working? Hmmmm, guess they shoulda been nicer to me and the kids when they had the chance?

I AGREE with the poster who quoted the attorney....if you aren't going to have kids...why get married? If you're going to get divorced....DO NOT have kids....or make sure you're able to support them yourself.
 GrandmaBooBoo
Joined: 12/30/2006
Msg: 104
view profile
History
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/1/2008 5:13:48 PM

If the KIDS' lifestyle was the only one people were worried about, the wouldn't the selfless act be for the parent with less income to give primary custody to the one with the higher income?
I believe that this IS EXACTLY what the "State" is working toward. At this point in our society....parental rights are already extremely fragile. In 1960 when my parents divorced, there were NO agencies to inforce "child support". If the father paid...he paid...and if he didn't (they usually didn't) then that was the end of it....it was a totally voluntary system. In the 1980's with the establishment of CSEA, many states made payroll deduction for child support "mandatory". Within a few years after the CSEA agency was established, the non custodial parent was regarded as "guilty until proven innocent". The agency, quite like the IRS...without the legal authority, but nobody willing to take them on....began to have bonuses, vacation pay, income tax refunds etc. all directed through their agency JUST IN CASE the paying parent might be "delinquent". It frequently took MONTHS for CSEA to release these funds to their rightful owner. When "the formula" was established it served only to discourage either parent from improving their financial status....as it had serious effects on the amount of child support either paid OR received. In less than 30 years, the situation swung from one extreme....to another. Now we're (tax payers) faced with the newest fastest growing group of "needy" people......mothers who's child support stopped when the kids turned 18. They were able to "survive" well enough on child support that they never stopped to consider HOW they would continue surviving....AFTER the kids turned 18.

It's wrong that the system over burdens the non custodial parents TODAY, as a direct result of seeing what happened when they didn't burden the non custodial parents AT ALL (pre 1980s) Well, it's nearly 30 yrs too late to start doing it RIGHT.....but what SHOULD have been incorporated into that "formula" was that the custodial parents....yes, usually the mothers, and usually underemployed and relatively uneducated or unskilled...should have had the stipulation that they MUST seek retraining, schooling or some means of becoming SELF SUPPORTING while being "assisted" through child support payments. That was unfortunately NOT the case.

What I see happening in the NEXT 30 yrs however is that the children WILL be "sold to the highest bidder".....who is still generally the male parent. The reason the male parent has more financial ability is because he is working that 1oo hrs a week mentioned by a previous post. This leaves NO time for child rearing, so therefore the children will HAVE to be reared by......you got it.....the STATE! I think this is what they've been after all along.....and I'm pretty sure that the next 50 yrs will prove that.
 starfun77
Joined: 11/3/2007
Msg: 106
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/1/2008 6:14:26 PM
Starfun7, you're talking about two different things here and one does not necessarily have anything to do with the other. Some women are greedy and some men simply abandon their kids after a split with the mother whether or not they pay support.

Sorry my dear, but one leads to the other. They are not exclusive! If a dad has to spend approx. $500 (just bcos mum moved us 5hrs away) to come see his kids once a month and then pays over 40% of his net salary as CS and you think its fair then I would like to see what is unfair in your view.

I see you are 30 years old and still angry at your mother for something that happened when you were 16. You sound like you have also been brainwashed by your father since you seem to think that mothers are all bad people and dads are all good.

My dad avoid talking bad about my mum under ANY circumstances. He keeps saying mum was young and made bad mistakes and that we shouldnt overlook the fact that she is blood and also raised us, (albiet with so much anger). My dad is such a wonderful man and I am amazed how he gets all that forgiveness and patience to deal with my mum. I am not angry at my mum anymore. I still have a good relationship with her and she has apologised on ends about her behaviour. She admits she was influenced by bad friends to leave the marriage. And she admits dad never yelled at her, hit her or cheated on her.
I have never said ALL mothers are bad. I just counter all the general notion that mothers seem to have that dads are worthless etc. Most women who have posted here (except few - like Blue Sunshine, GrandmaBooBoo etc) think men are evil, selfish, etc and should pay 100% of their net salary as CS. Thats my bone of contention here.

Now we're (tax payers) faced with the newest fastest growing group of "needy" people......mothers who's child support stopped when the kids turned 18. They were able to "survive" well enough on child support that they never stopped to consider HOW they would continue surviving....AFTER the kids turned 18.

You couldnt have said it better...!!!
If they just did 50/50 and let each parent prove their mettle, there'd be a whole lot less animosity. Award no child support unless it is deemed that 50/50 cannot be achieved (either because of distance, proven danger, or a parent simply walking away).
The Swedish have it better. That is exactly their divorce and child custody laws.
 sxyvirgo
Joined: 7/26/2006
Msg: 107
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/1/2008 6:26:14 PM

I told him that in North America (unlike United Kingdom), there is no maximum child support hence people pay as much as $5000/month for one child depending on their income.
Anyway does this make any sense? What normal child needs $5000/month? I read of a dad who paid such ridiculous amounts (average of $6250) for 13 years and therefore felt justified not leaving anything for this kid in his will. He had 3 other kids, btw!


It doesn't really matter what a kid NEEDS, does it? If they'd remained married, what would be spent on the child? Is the father saying that because he rejects the mother that his kids are now worth LESS than before? Guess he didn't really give a sh!t about them in the first place! Yeah, this really p!sses me off - and I don't even have any kids!
 lawgeek74
Joined: 3/7/2005
Msg: 110
view profile
History
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/1/2008 7:06:59 PM
I believe there should be a Child Support cap. It should capped at what is reasonable to provide for a child in their province before they reach 18. I think $5000 is excessive.

I have stated on other forums that the "best interest of the child" principle that guides family law has lead us astray and this of one of the ways it has. It provides that any prenuptial agreement specifying child support will be ignored by the court. I think something should be done about this. A cap would set some minds at ease about being financially devastated. I would advise the friend of the OP to marry someone in the UK instead if this is his concern.
 GrandmaBooBoo
Joined: 12/30/2006
Msg: 118
view profile
History
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/2/2008 7:57:17 AM

Without the kids, your rent will still be between $700-$1000 depending on where you live.
Careful there OP, you may be shooting yourself in the foot here. MANY places have a "base rent", and add $50-$100 per month PER child....or pet on top of that basic rent. ALSO, "depending on where you live" opens up the can of worms....that she HAS to move to a smaller town where rent is more affordable, thus making visitation more inconvenient and perhaps even eliminating weekday evening visits.

And, once again.....careful when throwing out ALL other considerations than monetary ones. Don't know about Canada....but the Ohio Revised Code stipulates that "Children man NOT be "warehoused" in daycare facilities. If your "friend" is making that $300K per year....and working that 100 hrs per week....then HE is NOT the one raising the kids....a stranger is. Now check into the costs of hiring child care providers....depending on where you live....and according to other threads here on POF, the average cost per hour IS $8-12. Get out your calculator....that's $3200 - $4800 a month just for child care, and doesn't even touch the cost of actually maintaining the childs other needs. I'm sure you begin to see the problem here??? When you present this kind of logic to a judge, it becomes quickly apparent that your interest is NOT really in what's best for the child...OR for your own wallet...but rather a vendetta against the ex; and judges frown on this!
 starfun77
Joined: 11/3/2007
Msg: 123
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/2/2008 12:11:19 PM

hasn't yet understood that divorce and child custody are two separate issues,

Wrong!! Wrong!! Wrong!! Child custody arises due to a marriage breakdown. They are not entirely seperate. The later is only possible due to the former (including seperation)! There is no child custody issues in an ongoing marriage!

No point in comparing Europe to North America

There have been so many instances where laws initiated from either side of the pond has been adopted across the other side. If its in the "best interests of the child(ren)", then who cares whether its French code/Bristish code/Socialist or Capitalist!!
 aprincelyfrog
Joined: 7/25/2006
Msg: 124
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/2/2008 12:16:20 PM
The courts are litered with the corpses of financially ruined men and not just because of the alimony. Houses, cars, retirement funds etc are routinely awarded "in support of the children."

I originally had to pay 60% of my gross income in child support. This left me with so little I could barely eat... I had to save every nickle and dime just to have money to buy food when they came over every other weekend.

We were very well off before the divorce, I was dead broke after the divorce. My ex was very well off and two attorneys could put their kids through college. In the end my ex ended up dead broke and bankrupt, lost the house and all those assets that were given "in support of the children" were gone!

I eventually ended up with custody of my kids and I played hell getting a single nickle out of her... the courts just don't believe women should have to pay the same percentages of their salaries as men do... AND don't even try using the courts to enforce a child support order against a woman!!! You'd be better off praying for pennies to rain from heaven!

I think any smart person with significant assets contemplating marriage will protect those assets at any cost. No person wants to see their children go hungry or go without an education. Limiting child support is not about denying any of that. It is about limiting the amount you pay to an ex, under the guise of child support, which is essential alimony.

It is reasonable to limit child support paid to an ex, and, if needed, make the person with the greater assets (prenup author) fund certain child rearing expenses such as education and health care so long as the person with assets continues to have those assets.

It is unreasonable to assume the person with assets should maintain two households at equal status so that "he doesn't live in a mansion and the kids in a shack". If the custodial parent can't contribute enough to maintain a semblance of lifestyle perhaps they shouldn't be the custodial parent.
 aprincelyfrog
Joined: 7/25/2006
Msg: 125
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/2/2008 12:23:17 PM
bye the way, Oscat, 50/50 when men are able to go through a pregnancy, a labor, and breastfeed! Every psychologist will fully understand this: no bond is like the one with the person that kept you inside for 9 months....this might be why custody gets by default given to the mother.

Never, ever, ever have I read anything so stupid in my entire life!!!

You should hang around the children of custodial fathers and hear what these children have to say about their mothers... not what they have heard their fathers say... but just the experiences the children have with their mothers. More often than not you will find that the person who carried them for 9 months and breastfed them and all that other crap you stated has the maternal instincts of a rattle snake!!! You will also find the fathers to be the loving, caring nurturing parent usually exceeding anything any woman can provide.

The presence of a functioning uterous is no more of an idication of parental suitability than any thing else.
 aprincelyfrog
Joined: 7/25/2006
Msg: 129
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/2/2008 1:02:49 PM
^^^^ or perhaps it is YOUR false conditioned view that prevents you from seeing that men are just as capable as women.

Here's a great little factoid:

68% of the men who are required to pay child support do so... this leaves 32% as deadbeat dads.

57% of women who are required to pay child support do so... this leaves 43% as deadbead moms.

The feminist.com also considers the custodial mom who refuses to allow the father to visit their children to be deadbeat moms...

Many men refuse to pay child support if they are denied visitation and many women will deny visitation just because.

Just go google "percentage of deadbeat moms" and get the real statistics.

This is a VERY messy topic and the OP is right to try and resolve this prior to marriage.
 Chella81
Joined: 10/22/2007
Msg: 132
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/2/2008 7:38:51 PM
I'm only 25 and have full legal custody of my sisters two youngest kids 8 and 5, in order for their father to sign over custody I had to agree that he did not owe any back child support and that he would not have to pay any child support for either child currently nor in the future. However, in the papers ( I guess he didn't read them or he wouldn't have signed) but it states at anytime the State of Alabama can reopen a child support hearing and make him have to pay support, both spouses income apply towards the amount of the support payment. Since their father has been remarried if either one got a job or both worked (neither do) both incomes would be considered for the child support payment.
I understand what you are saying about going back for support or the court doing so is the same in Alabama.
 starfun77
Joined: 11/3/2007
Msg: 141
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/4/2008 12:59:41 PM
So here we go again...the pre-nup is not solely the guy's idea. Everyone seems to be protecting their turf and rightfully so....!! You dont want to be caught with your pants down when it comes to this...
BTW, "Oscat" and "mindmyownbusiness" good banter between you 2. Very matured and interesting "couple" you 2 will be....
 atunedhead
Joined: 9/26/2007
Msg: 142
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/4/2008 1:54:26 PM
Just my couple of pennies.

Why would your friend want to have a *predetermined* amount for his own children? It is going to be his children, so would he not want them to get the best in life?
 Bige
Joined: 5/9/2004
Msg: 145
view profile
History
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/4/2008 2:32:16 PM
"If the dad is living in a mansion why the hell should his kid live in a shack"

The kid shouldnt live in a shack,,, but why should his ex not be living in one? He should get custody and sue her sorry ass (if all she can provide is a "shack") for every dime he can get.... What's good for the goose is good for the gander
 starfun77
Joined: 11/3/2007
Msg: 147
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/4/2008 6:09:56 PM
HappyGilmore, you are a genus!
Very Well said!!

Tell him to
 naeco
Joined: 12/16/2007
Msg: 150
Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/4/2008 6:38:40 PM

So here we go again...the pre-nup is not solely the guy's idea. Everyone seems to be protecting their turf and rightfully so....!!


No, you don't protect your turf from your own children. That's just wrong. If he wants to limit what the future wife might get, then fine. If he want to leave her with nothing, then fine. But any lowlife who would try to limit what their children can get simply doesn't deserve to even have children. That's revolting.
Show ALL Forums  > Relationships  >