Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

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

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

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Single Parents  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Giantrican
Joined: 1/15/2008
Msg: 137
what is child support meant for?Page 14 of 15    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15)
I dont know if I agree with that, I know it cost money and they always make the father out to be the bad guy. But that shouldnt be, I want to know where my money is going then it going for a car payment or some stuff for my ex I should get to see what is really my "child support" going too!
 davidsauvignon
Joined: 2/6/2008
Msg: 141
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/23/2008 12:18:13 AM
^^^" The guy is sending money that he is, for all intents and purposes, earning. He is living up to his financial responsibilities to his kid(s). He's happy, the kid's happy, it's all good."

No capitano_blaugh....the kids may be happy (they're getting everthing they want, let alone need), the Dad may be happy (he fulfills his support obligation)....but I have a very strong hunch....Trish is not a 'happy' person....not a happy camper whatsoever...maybe she will be one day...hopefully.


~ds~
 davidsauvignon
Joined: 2/6/2008
Msg: 152
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/23/2008 5:58:54 PM
"Exactly what is "mediocre" support anyway?"
OP: "to be exact,, $126 a week for three kids all over the age of ten."

Okay, we now have Trish's definition of "mediocre support". $126/week is mediocre. What was your annual income when the support was set at $126/wk Trish?

OP: "you had to ask a question based on a hunch or educated guess. thats what i did. based on the musings of both sides that i had heard radomly and unsolicited over the years, i wanted to ask a question based on that experience, not my personal individual experience with the matter. I wanted to see if i posted the question would it bring out of the woodwork, ncp's attempting to justify themselves when they knew the ordered payment was much under what would be reasonable, what they would do."

This being your underlying purpose of the thread, I think you've failed Trish. More importantly, I think you've cut off your own nose and in so doing, spited your face. This may have been your intention, but what you've actually done, is portray yourself as a liar, deceiver and manipulator. All for the sake of bashing men in general and due to your own self-pity.

One day, there may be a guy who comes across your profile and takes an interest. Hopefully, he will have the foresight to read your threads and come across this one where you basically say, "I'm a deceptive and manipulative person and will go to whatever lengths it takes to prove a point and show I'm right (at least in my own mind)."

As I mentioned in an earlier post....Good luck to you, Trish.


~ds~
 davidsauvignon
Joined: 2/6/2008
Msg: 154
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/23/2008 8:03:27 PM
^^^" The whole point of her argument is twisting words."

Exactly coachjfl! Anyone can go back through the thread and see where she tried to manipulate the topic. When she was making idiotic proclamations and called on it, became beligerant and indignant, and tried to redirect the focus. She's nothing but a troll with nothing better to do and obviously enough time on her hands to get a second job and pay for what she feels her ex should "pony up".


~ds~
 davidsauvignon
Joined: 2/6/2008
Msg: 155
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/23/2008 8:42:19 PM
^^^her ex should "pony up".

Oh wait...I doubt she actually has an ex or kids....forgot this was just something she made up and was a "what if" scenario....sorry, getting confused in keeping up with her deception...


~ds~
 4408joseph
Joined: 1/10/2008
Msg: 157
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/23/2008 9:02:45 PM
Naw, with a zillion other support threads, some filled with the same playing the same song, it's a "scenario" question to let ride.....IMHO


Even Joey who I have poked a few times has seemingly done what needed to be done even if it meant working over time.


As yes, the price to pay for being a "DAD"...To work the holiday weekend through including daybreak Easter morning before fighting the C&E Crowd at
Church to watch the Princess sing, and then after Family get together ,back to the grind for a few hours before dark get equipment ready for monday.....
Or was that to make up for the screw off time spent in this very ENTERTAINING thread thursday...LMAO... Either way, glad I don't have to keep a hourly
work log for the NCP


No matter what you do say or post, I respect the fact that another father is raising his children without the help of his ex


Back at ya!!!!!

That's all that's needed, Respect. I give it to all the SP's and nothing else, nor do I want anything else. If I want to have a little "star".ed badge over my breast pocket that reads " Parent Sharpshooter" or " Child rearing Expert" , I'd be in law enforcement where that type of ego boosting is standard.

Nope just doing an 18 year contract that started as a shot in the dark...lol

Seems all the NCP's pissing stories and tell us all it's rain have left the thread, but at P.T Barnum said "There's one born every minute"

For the next, I'll ask... If the NCP's payments, Are taking care of the kids, buying a house, buying cars, and a work free lifestyle for the CP.....can't you do the same with less mouths to feed and your check balance??? Or am I to believe more then 50% net goes to the CP????

Well, just as I call that out.........Here comes some more rather ENTERTAINING B.S.



then he said
"" any way the company pays my child support,,,,thats deal i made if they wanted me to run the company ""

which is it? either the payment is off of your wages or its not. either way, the second statement doesnt say much in your favor. it says you're a cheap ba$tard, who is proud to openly declare that he doesnt support his kids. i guess at the end of the day as long as they get the financial support they need thats all thats required, but,, in the final analogy, like when they are old enough to decipher that dear ol dad skirted his responsibility and used it as a bargaining chip for employment, i do have to wonder just how dear you will be to your kids when that reality really settles in with them.
leaving the responsiblity of the support of your kids to the company you work for isnt anything to be proud of.


WTF, and again reinforeced by.......


this is directly to the point, HE isnt meeting the obligation, in that situation, the company he works for is picking up his support on their dime, not his wages. you clearly missed what he said. he said,, THAT HIS CHILD SUPPORT OBLIGATION IS PAYED BY THE COMPANY HE WORKS FOR IN THAT HE USED IT AS A BARGAINING CHIP. I.E.-, he runs the company only if they pay his support order and not use his wages to pay it. we arent talking a deduction from wages, we are talking the company covering the cost of the order. ( read once please)



Now doesn't that just speak volumes???? Money is paid, and now it's an issuein your mind the way it's done. Well, it doesn't take Sigmund Frued here. I can read this one is easy as a drugstore novel., someone with this kind of thinking needs to speak with a professional in my mind, cuz this is just some backaze-wards thinking ...PERIOD.

Here take a minute on how this works in the REAL world as an employer ...

TOP NOTCH Employee..........$45/hour
Supplied w Co. truck................$37/hour
Trk and Gas C.C.......................$30/hour
Trk,C.C. & Unlimited Cell........$29/hour
Trk,C.C, Cell, & Ins...................$26/hour
Trk,C.C. Cell,Ins, Clothing,.....$25/hour
Trk,C.C.,Cell,Ins,Clothing and other outside made obligations in respect to working contract, such as Company Condo, Local sports team season passes
use of Company limo 2 weekends out of year, company laptop and connection, company swim club or time share passes, and even agreedsupport check
.....................................maybe...$20/hour


Bottom line, an employee to an company is an asset inX dollars no matter how you slice it,dice, or barter it....period... If it comes out of the check it's compensation
for his/her work hours to the company... To belittle or manipulate in your mind it's less of a payment is insane...

On that note I guess if the X was to land a lottery winning/ or inherence and decided to write a one time advanced check in the total sum of weekly payments until the child(ren)'s 18th
birthday, to be done, that too would be skirting the responsibility of support. Oh Pleeeeeze!!

i do want to comment on davids last point however; as i as well as an adult find it totally ludicrous that either parent should have to account financially for their decisions. my discretionary income is mine to spend as i see fit, as is my childrens fathers. as long as our children are being looked after in an acceptable standard it is not his right to question how i spend the maintanence he contributes.....its obviously being used to "maintain" the children. and as long as he's contributing what was deemed appropriate by the court then it's not my business if he chooses to spend his discretionary income on cars, vacations whatever......


Abso-TOOT-ly..... Cripes when my x was a stay home I gave here a hundred a week or so that I never even would think about asking for receipts. In OUR earlier winters
when she'd pick up a 10-12 dollar an hour job, she got HER car payment book and insurance notice back,cut off the money, BUT... the rest was Her's


All you have to do is live with someone, and you are the victim of legal extortion.


My apologizes to all in the "f" -up great north...My I suggest what they do at OUR SOUTHERN border???? Sneak in and work under the table.


Maybe I am too proud to ask but should I in the first place?


Has nothing to do with pride... Responsibility and realistically is the key here.

The children should receive a lifestyle conducive to what is in the responsible means of the people that begot the child..period.

I emphasize 'Responsible" Parents.

I will close with another PT quote....................

"Those who really desire to attain an independence, have only set their minds upon it, and adopt the proper means, as they do in regard to any other object which they wish to accomplish, and the thing is easily done."
 4408joseph
Joined: 1/10/2008
Msg: 160
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/23/2008 10:04:00 PM

Not true..At least not in all professions.


I'm sorry there....THIS is how it is when I hire someone......

Except .........

and other outside made obligations in respect to working contract, such as Company Condo, Local sports team season passes
use of Company limo 2 weekends out of year, company laptop and connection, company swim club or time share passes, and even agreedsupport check


Just because I don't own: limo,passes,condo,time share,.........and wouldn't be foolish enough to agree to another person's support check...

It was more of a realistic example (for me hiring an employee) then a technical example, as for how many employees have companys ageeing to pay child support??????

But this would be about the numbers if I was hiring you...

BTW a take home truck is 12K a year bennie as a rule of thumb....
 brandy_n_3
Joined: 8/27/2006
Msg: 163
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/24/2008 8:29:59 AM
First off Johne shut up already, this thread has nothing to do with the woe begotten step father, i is about child support and what it is used for, I am so sick and tired of listening to you over something that does not even concern you.

Johnny B Rotten, it certainly sounds like you got the short oend of the stick. I think monitoring of the overall situation for the kids is important when there is a desire of both parent to have custody. After all it is supposed to be decided in the best interest of the children. But what do you suggest in a situation where one parent simply walks away from the children? In my situation in the 7 years my ex and I have been separated he has seen the kids a handful of times, only just started paying support after christmas, never contacts them through cards, letters, email, or phone, no gifts for birthdays. I let him know when my son had to be put completely under for an MRI at age 3, he didn't even ask if he was okay, When the kids got chicken pox and my son developed secondary infections, nothing, When my son got hosptialized for 2 weeks for mental health issues, he wouldn't even give us a family medical history(turns out several members of his family including himself were hospitalized at a young age for the same reason, I found this out from my ex SIL) When I invited him out to the kids sporting events, nothing, My daughter's he said he would come to my son's semi finals baseball game and never showed. My son hit the winning run that game and went looking for his dad to high five but he wasn't there. When the kids got dedicated at church he said he would come but didn't. My daughter went looking for him because she made a card for him, but he wasn't there.

For every CP that stone walls a NCP there is a NCP that just doesn't give a damn. My ex finally signed the custody papers making it official at christmas time. I had the kids with me, he didn't even want to see them. They cried the whole way home asking why their dad hates them. I sucks for the kids no matter how you cut it, if one parent walks away or one parent stonewalls the other it is the kids that suffer.

The fight is almost always over how much child support one parent is or is not paying, whent he fight should be about the best interests of the child. My ex still has access to the kids, our custoday ppers say open and reasonable visitation which is what I requested, which means that there is no set days, just call me up, and as long as they don't have a prior commitment they will be at the door with shoes on waiting for you. In 7 years he has never cared enough to try to see them even once a year let alone as often as he could. We lived in the same city for almost 2 years and I didn't even know it becase he never bothered to contact us until he wa moving away again.

My point in all this rambling, is yes I agree their shoudl be monitoring of the entire situation, both parents etc if both parents are trying to be a part of the child(ren)'s lives, but in the case where one parent simply walks away, I think the CP should be left well enough alone even if they reguire help lkike those you listed, because they are doing thebest they can for the kids involved in this situation, kids who never asked for the chaos and uncertainty that divorce/separation etc brings.
 brandy_n_3
Joined: 8/27/2006
Msg: 166
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/24/2008 11:07:47 AM
I don't think they should be allowed to do that. It's one thing to get child support for the kids, but to expect your ex spouse to be paying for spousal support in higher amounts because the kids are grown is crazy. If the kidsare grown then you are more than able to work fulltime and support yourself. I can see not working fulltime when the kids are small and therefore getting a bit of spousal support, but to increase the amount just because child support stopped is one of the stupidest things I have seen. What a great way to make pther think all single parents are nothing but gold diggers by creating a law that enables those that are gold diggers to go for more with no solid reason, where is a head slapping emoticon when you need one.
 davidsauvignon
Joined: 2/6/2008
Msg: 182
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/25/2008 5:20:26 PM
coachjfl: "If your not happy with the present situation take them to court and see what comes out of it. However, dont be surprised if you walk out with nothing. It's as simple as that."

I was done with this thread, but I'll add one more comment....if you're not happy with the present situation, contact your respective congresspersons!


~ds~
 Lookin4possibilites
Joined: 6/4/2007
Msg: 201
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/27/2008 6:24:08 PM

My beef is simply that there are women who are very cavalier about the CS they receive and never acknowledge that it isn't always easy for the payor to make those payments, but many men do it and never miss a payment.

I am trying so hard to stay out of this discussion because I don't think it can go anyplace good but I HAVE to comment on this.
How many payors acknowledge that it is not always easy for the payee? Even when the payors payments don't come? We all still need to make it work.
For me, if I hear my son's father complain one more time how his pathetic excuse for child support is draining him, I think I am going to scream. I could go into messy details here but lets just say his payments are no where near "his portion" of what it takes to support his son between out of pocket medical needs alone over the past years that his father was supposed to be covering his health ins but wasn't...but yet I always make it work for my kids somehow. If it means some creative finances, finding a way to make more money when it is nearly impossible, myself going without, etc, I and many others make it work. I never take the bills to Domestic Relations to be tacked on because I don't see a need to add to his arrears...or for a re-evaluation because it just isn't worth the hassle (although I would love to see his response as they told him the new numbers), but he keeps on crying broke.
No one ever said supporting a child would be easy for ANYONE. I do feel for the parents who are being bled for it, and the ones that pay it faithfully and are still being bled...I think that is really sad actually. In the end though, there are many payors out there who don't realize what it actually takes to care for a child. They cry because they have to switch to generic cigs, or can't go out to spend what they want when they want. WAH!
There ARE good and bad on both sides...again, we all know that the system needs a revamp in some way but there isn't a way to revamp it that would be appropriate for every situation. Hugs to all of us who have to deal with the sucky system, the complaining exes and the headaches of needing to struggle on BOTH sides of the issue!
 ShadowLands
Joined: 3/25/2008
Msg: 221
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/28/2008 4:09:44 PM

I'd love to see the day when women have to start paying CS and alimony as often as men do and see how much you all like having someone else control your bank account. I think the day is coming, and I welcome it. Of course, I'm also sure that when that day arrives, the laws will finally change.


Well....me too but it won't start here in Texas. In this state if you are the male of the species you can expect the following treatment in cases of divorce and child support:

1. You are nothing but a sperm donor.

2. You are identified not as a parent but as an account number.

3. Fully expect to be treated as an ATM machine.

Period. Unless the mother of your children is a blatant crack-whore seen screwing for drugs on the courthouse steps at high noon by a live television crew.......you're in deep shit. Does not matter if your wife was screwing around on you for six months before the divorce or the fact that the person she was screwing happens to be the very same lawyer representing her in court. Welcome to Harris County.

I'm fully aware of what child support is supposed to be used for. Anything the custodial parent (note that I did not say "mother" or "father") feels is necessary for the care and well-being of the child in question. That's it. Pretty wide swath is it not? I understand this and I accept this. The one thing I cannot fathom is the fact that due to my success at my chosen career path and the additional income that success has provided that I should be forced to pay roughly 24% of my income to the custodial parent who won't keep a job for more than two months at a time. My success should not have to pay for her ineptitude or laziness.
 jojoaus
Joined: 10/28/2007
Msg: 239
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 9/19/2009 6:02:20 AM
Haven't read any of the thread but I'm posting anyway.... I had to laugh the other day. I got a shiny letter in the post from the agency here in Aus that determines child support. It was printed on gorgeous paper, and had a motto which indicated they were THERE for separated families ( I recycled it.. cant recall the stupid effing thing properly) ... it informed me that whatever CP my ex used to pay would cease when she turns 18 in November. The next week I got ANOTHER letter calculating the exact amount I would be due from the end of the financial year til her birthday... yep!!! $0.00... in black and white! I have never ever recieved a penny from her d!ckhead dad in 12 years even when he worked (briefly... sacked for turning up to work off his face) or when he inherited quite a lot from his dad when he died (Alzheimers- was awful).
Sorry- I do get a bad case of sour grapes when I hear that there are great dads out there who can think beyond themselves and actually give a crap about not only their kids, but their kid's mum and how she is coping. I even leant my ex money when we split (never repaid), bought him a tv, helped him move... So I do apologise to those who wonder HOW CP should be spent but after a decade of never seeing a penny... you can guess my feelings.
 Stafford_Jim
Joined: 8/12/2009
Msg: 242
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 9/20/2009 1:04:21 PM

From the way I have always viewed it ... unless otherwise dictated by legal documents, it is meant to be spent on anything that pertains to the upkeep of the child ... clothes, food, roof over their head, medical expenses, sports fees, heat, water.

I can even see that it could be spent for a doggone lawn mower. If you have children that need to play in their backyard and it needs to be mowed ... then it could be spent on a lawnmower.


And here is a prime example of what's wrong with the system. You can justify any use for the money and tell yourself it's OK to do so as long as you even very loosely tie it to the children.

I have a backyard and I don't have children, it still requires mowing though.

I know too many men who pay child support and their experiences with rationale like yours are the reason I will never have any children of my own. I will marry a woman who already has children, but I will never give her children.
 big pacific
Joined: 7/2/2009
Msg: 247
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 9/21/2009 10:44:40 AM
It's amazing to me, i was raised with very modest means, and these things that kids absolutely HAVE to have i didn't even grow up with in my house with 2 parents lol.

Sports? If they were free i could play, enrollment fees weren't part of my parents budget, it was THAT tight growing up.

I think it's difficult to decide what children "need". Half the stuff i've seen on here, overnight trips, vacays with school were never an option for me, and i don't feel deprived not having them.

I think when custody stops being 4 to 1 in favor of women, men won't be so angry about this anymore.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 250
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 9/24/2009 8:52:53 PM
[I'd love to see the day when women have to start paying CS and alimony as often as men do and see how much you all like having someone else control your bank account. I think the day is coming, and I welcome it. Of course, I'm also sure that when that day arrives, the laws will finally change.]

I have often enjoyed your posts, as they speak of intelligence, but this one compels me to comment, even at the rick of argument. We will see that day when we see the day that (more) men are just as willing to take REAL responsibility for their children on a daily basis. Before you attack me, I am well aware that there are many men who would like to take a bigger part in their children's daily activities; I am also aware of their excuses for not doing so, none of which amount to taking any responsibility for same. My point is that the (valid) argument that things haven't changed all that much works both ways. Women don't pay alimony and/or CS as they are most often the lower half of the wage equation and the children are more likely to reside with them (in most cases, without argument). As far as CS, you'll not convince me of anything other than the fact that the custodial parent is far more likely to spend in excess of state mandated percentages of their income on their children than the non custodial parent.

Of course, there are many exceptions, on both sides, but let's be honest here. It is most often convenient, for both genders, to blame the other for their not spending as much time with their kids as they should, or not being able to afford something.

From what I have seen, decent mothers (and fathers) with custody would have little problem accounting for how they spend the CS they receive, as child related expenses easily exceed half of state guidelines. For me personally, I question those who speak of the custodial parent as someone who "drinks or drugs the money away". If that is the case, why not fight for custody? Please don't waste our time with how unfair the courts are; they take drug & alcohol abuse VERY seriously. If you are willing, for any reason, to leave your child in the care of one who is unfit, you are just as bad!

The notion that receiving child support is akin to controlling someone's bank account is preposterous! It seems to me that this issue could be put to rest merely by an accounting of spending for one's children. I have no problem with that. Perhaps actually making a move in that direction, would be more productive than merely using particular personal experiences to make general statements aimed towards one gender. Just my two cents.
 big pacific
Joined: 7/2/2009
Msg: 256
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 9/25/2009 9:25:04 AM

Child support is intended to give the child the same QUALITY of life they had prior to the break up. The system is not perfect and I know it doesn't always turn out that way, but that is it's intention. If the child is participating in sport prior to the break up then sports money is part of the child support. If you did not pay for that while together then child support won't cover it. It has nothing to do with the parents and their ability to live and everything to do with the child and their quality of life. ( I do NOT think there should be extenuating circumstances unless there truly is a NEED for extra such as a child get really sick and has tremendous medical bills, or truly needs therapy, bootcamp or something like that.) If a person is living within their means then child support being taken out of their check should not put them on the streets (again this is how it is supposed to work, i understand there are problems with it).


I completely understand. Choices have results though, if we are really concerned about the child first, and their quality of life maybe divorce shouldn't be the first action? Sure there are extenuating circumstances in some cases, but how many parents divorce for their own happiness and forsake the happiness of their children and then bemoan the quality of lifestyle without funding, when REALLY the quality of life is having 2 FULL time parents.


I think alot of people needs to step back and reevaluate what is needed versus what is wanted. I go into a lot of peoples homes (married and single) and can't believe all the extras they have that they think are necessary.


That is actually EXACTLY my point. The fact is divorce will NEVER have the same quality of life for children, and parents that think it will are either sticking their head in the sand or lying to feel better about themselves. I'm sorry, sports are NOT i repeat NOT a need of children. Would it be great if little johnny can play t-ball? hell yes it would, and i'd love it to happen but it isn't necessary. You are making a decision when you get divorced, a decision that has serious emotional AND financial ramifications. You are going to have to sacrifice, and your child is too unfortuneatly. Parents usually aren't willing to stick it out for their kids like they used to, theres more and more of a selfish "if i'm happier, my kids will be happier" bullshit going around.

To expect these extras, when you make a choice to deprive a kid of 2 full time parents and make a decision that puts you in financial jeopardy is silly. You can get a divorce, but things are going to change for you and your family, thats PART of the choice. Maybe the choice to divorce would be made less frequently if people lived for their kids instead of themselves. BOTH genders.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 266
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 9/26/2009 5:20:32 AM
[Women don't pay alimony and/or CS as they are most often the lower half of the wage equation and the children are more likely to reside with them (in most cases, without argument).]
[Yes, which is because of the choices women make more than anything. More women really should get thier careers together and well underway before squirting out kids.
I don't have the info at hand, but there is lots of info out there about the difference betewen how many more custodial male parents work full-time compared with custodial female parents. The difference is significant.
There is a higher percentage of women who default on their CS payments than do men.
Women state openly that they will not support a man financially in a relationship. I really can't see how they're gonna be too happy giving their ex money after he's gone.
Even though it's a pretty ridiculously unrealistic scenario, tell me how you'd like it if you were the sole breadwinner for years in your marriage while hubby stayed home, but was unhappy, decided to bang someone else, left you, gets custody the kids and half of everything money YOU earned had bought during the marriage.
Then HE can demand spousal support, collect the tax benefits for the kids, and collect up to half of YOUR hard-earned money until the kids reach the age of majority.
Oh, me-o-my, oh Joy! Oh Bliss!
Yes, yes, you and every other woman out there claims that she'd happily pay.]

I don't have the time, nor do I feel the need, to address every point in the above that irks me, but since broad generalizations annoy me, I will say these few things:

Your comments seem to assume that women, and women alone, choose to have children. The majority of women receiving CS were, if not married, at least involved in a serious relationship with their children's father. Arguments regarding laws pertaining to the choice to have a baby aside as for now, since they do exist, both parents chose to risk having a child, knowing the consequences. Even if one disagrees with these laws, they have that choice while they still have their pants on. If I assume you are talking about "girls" who randomly lay down, I admit they exist. However, the majority of "deadbeats" are the ones with whom they lay, so they are NOT the majority of those who collect CS. Exceptions aside (and I agree, there are many, of both genders), the custodial parent who only works part time has young children not yet in school, unless, of course, you are speaking of my ex, who chose to cut his hours as a means to reduce CS.
Not intending to use these forums for personal attacks, I chose to post a particular fact only as recognition that everything is not black & white in this issue. For the record, I DO happily pay, each & every day, to ensure my kids' well being. How simple it would seem to map out your life in anticipation of raising children alone; unfortunately, human nature doesn't work that way. Even if it did, putting one's career on hold to raise children is most often a decision TWO parents make, resulting in the at home parent forfeiting income, as well as retirement, insurance, etc.
You & I both know that either one of us could find data supporting for our argument, as statistics are easily manipulated. What I don't understand is how a decent parent who was willing to provide for their children, suddenly decides that doing so in unwarranted.
In any case, it seems that the problem is that those who pay CS have a problem with accounting for where the money goes. You seem to have missed that point. Changes are easiest made in small steps, and it would seem that this small change to CS would be one worth pursuing, if that would make the difference to those who protest.
 Walygatr
Joined: 8/25/2009
Msg: 270
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 9/26/2009 10:24:01 AM
My ex was given the minimum support ordered in my state ($150.00 per month) In the 14 years I had custody she paid a total of $600 bucks. She now owes me thousands and can't get a drivers license. Child support can be like herpes, It may never go away.
 Walygatr
Joined: 8/25/2009
Msg: 273
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 9/27/2009 8:46:55 AM

Similar story here in the UK. However, I've had a dig around the net and not come across a single female having been incarcerated for not paying her CS. How is it in Missouri?


I've never heard of it here in the states. My ex owes me and can't get her drivers license until she pays me a substantial amount. In a lot of cases women who lose custody of children go on to have more, thus gaining sympathy from the courts.
 privat33r
Joined: 2/8/2009
Msg: 274
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 9/27/2009 3:50:32 PM
The purpose of child support is to provide a custodial parent with the means to continue their life without significant change in circumstance. If they would like to use it for gas to go places with their kids great - if they'd like to put it towards vacations with the notion of finding prospective 2nd guys that also works.

Its also a method for the government to make it clear that breaking up is not a method to manipulate someone - and that the lifestyles of the two parents do not significantly diverge simply as a result of the breakup. The governement doesn't want breakups to be a source of new liabilities that have to be paid for with taxes. They also consider marriage for the person making less money as a shared/pension arrangement - that reduces their long term liabilities with respect to families. Otherwise they'd have to fill in income for one side of a divorcing coupe all the time.

The real point is that Parent A who makes more money shouldn't be able to breakup from parent B in order to make that parent poor. It has no relationship to where the money is spent at all. If you'd like you money spent on your kids retain custody.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 275
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 9/27/2009 4:30:27 PM
[While recognising that in marriage-like relationships women will most often consult their SO about having kids, women ARE the only ones who can decide to bring children into the world. Men have exactly ZERO say in her decision.]

Men certainly DO have a hand in the decision. Knowing full well the laws re:abortion, the difference is that men have no choice but to decide while they are still dressed. I'm not saying this is fair, but it is the way it is.

[You pay CS? Good for you. I do too. The vast majority of men who are ordered to pay, do so as well.]

Anyone who provides for their children is supporting them, whether they pay that money to someone else or not. I was addressing your comment stating that women "claim" that they would pay happily. Many CS (men & women alike) are thankful for this opportunity, although the majority of the cost is often borne by the custodial parent.

[So you are saying that statistics are not worth looking at?]

I'm not saying that they are totally meaningless, I'm only saying that statistics can be used as evidence for either side of an argument. Again, often a parent who works only part time is responsible for a younger than school age child; doesn't change the stats, but it may change the argument. For example, one could say that since 84% of CPs are women, men must not be as interested in their kids. Statistics are merely cumulative data, not statements of fact, that's all.

[My ex and her life choices are more typical, aside from the house renos, than uncommon.
And that is MY point that many women seem to miss. There are many women out there who choose not to bring as much to the table, financially, as they could because they are collecting CS that affords them the luxury of working less than they could.]

Who says this is typical? YOUR experience tells you so; mine tells me a completely different story, but I know better (not better than you, it's just that I realize that my experience is not the only experience). There is not one single mother or father I have encountered who lives this way, not one, and I know many. It is unfair to assume to know anyone's motivation. How could you possibly know the reason one "chooses" to forfeit income?

In any case, again, my point is that there seems to be an awful lot of complaining (not from you personally, per se) about the CS system, and I don't disagree that there are problems with those who take advantage. However, I believe that narrowing it down, and finding a point that can be dealt with in some simpler fashion, would be a beginning to effect change. Accounting for CS monies spent would seem at least a first step towards fairness.

 singlesuperdad
Joined: 8/26/2009
Msg: 278
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 9/28/2009 10:51:38 AM
I can't believe it took 15 pages to answer a simple question. Child support is meant for the non-Cp to do their part to support a kid they brought into this world. Simple as that, why 15 pages, lol.
 DrummerDadTim
Joined: 1/15/2009
Msg: 280
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 10/1/2009 9:52:00 PM
There is new legislature being written In NC right now by a Senator in my area- basically that All CS be paid into an account set up by the state in the Child's name- the prinmary custody parent would receive a "Debit Card"- similar to an EBT card- this card could then be used to purchase "approved" items only- such as Childrens clothes, school supplies, kid's toys, food, etc- In other word's -kid needed item's only. Sort of like you can't put alcohol or non food on an EBT card. This would insure that the money was spent on the child/children, not your ex's new boyfriends motorcycle payment or vacation. Buzz is it is expected to pass the House easily, and may set a new precedent for all Sates. It's a great idea in theory!!
 singlesuperdad
Joined: 8/26/2009
Msg: 282
view profile
History
what is child support meant for?
Posted: 10/2/2009 2:00:57 PM

There is new legislature being written In NC right now by a Senator in my area- basically that All CS be paid into an account set up by the state in the Child's name- the prinmary custody parent would receive a "Debit Card"- similar to an EBT card- this card could then be used to purchase "approved" items only- such as Childrens clothes, school supplies, kid's toys, food, etc- In other word's -kid needed item's only. Sort of like you can't put alcohol or non food on an EBT card. This would insure that the money was spent on the child/children, not your ex's new boyfriends motorcycle payment or vacation. Buzz is it is expected to pass the House easily, and may set a new precedent for all Sates. It's a great idea in theory!!


It is a good idea in theory but I don't know how it's could be inforced. An EBT card for food is hard enough to enforce. I see many that give their card to others with the pin nunmber and recieve money for their food stamps. But what you are saying how are they going to know if the clothes are for the kid, or if I by a laptop (could be for her or me), or a new bicycle, etc. The same can be done with this card and buy things for other with money in exchange.

Someone said putting the Childsupprt towards the rent and bills ensures the money is used wisely in the childs benifit but no method is perfect and people will always find a way to get around it.
Show ALL Forums  > Single Parents  >