child support

that is the transportation i currently use.
i want to reiterate that these so called excuses i am stating are not my own. im putting scenarios out there to get opinions. i live in a semi rural area where there are buses and such. its not that far to get somewhere. im just making a statement for those that MAY be in a situation like that.
but you say to use a bus, get a bike, whatever. well, if a person isnt working, how is a person expected to pay for such expenses? problem with alot of things is that they evolve around money. there is very little you can do without money.

and no, im not wondering about the ex. if im required to support a child, the mother should as well instead of using free money to get by. and the mother should be required to allow visitation. guess what tho, they arent.

and have you wondered why when it comes to talking about something like this, its assumed taht the non custodial parent is the male?

there is no excuse for why the custodial parent cannot provide monetary support either
 
Bigboy said:
Um I think you might be taking this hypothetical scinereo a bit too seriously. MO says he's always paid and fully believes he should, but that may not always be the case. It varries from state to state.
Click to expand...

I made my comment from his feedback about his ex wife. Please read it. There is obviously more to the story than it being hypothecal.
 
Kat said:
PS. If worse comes to worse, I see people all the time walking down the sides of roads picking up tin cans and taking them to the dump. Here in Illinois you can get $40.00 per lb. I think it is, for just picking up tin cans and it's not taxable income.

So again, I reiterate, there is NO excuse for not helping support your child.
Click to expand...
there is no refund for cans here. in fact, believe it or not, finding cans along the road isnt common either. there are programs here left and right where people do "adopt the highway" and they are quite clean.
 
Kat said:
I made my comment from his feedback about his ex wife. Please read it. There is obviously more to the story than it being hypothecal.
Click to expand...
only some of it was real situation. the living in the country, no transportation at all, etc, that was all "what if" scenario.
if use a bike on a daily basis. so, yes, i do have a way to get around. and it takes maybe 15-30 mins to get to the middle of anything. thats about 5 miles tho.
but if you think about things and put everything into perspective, you may not see it as an excuse, i dont see any excuse being a legit excuse either. but, if you work for, lets say mcdonalds, home depot, or whatever, do you think that they would find it acceptable to come to work absolutely soaking wet if it were raining when you walked/rode your bike to work? up to a point it would be acceptable, but what if it was fairly often? there becomes a point in time that it goes too far
 
Kat said:
PS. If worse comes to worse, I see people all the time walking down the sides of roads picking up tin cans and taking them to the dump. Here in Illinois you can get $40.00 per lb. I think it is, for just picking up tin cans and it's not taxable income.

So again, I reiterate, there is NO excuse for not helping support your child.
Click to expand...

Holy crap! Thats so much more than we get for cans here in California. >.<

The problem that comes into play is when your money is no longer going towards the child, and is instead going to mommy, who then throws a fit when you don't send the kid over with 5 sets of cloths each week. In an ideal situation where both parties get along, the discussion is kinda moot, as everything will get taken care of as it's supposed to. All too often though, when Mom didn't work before the seperation, she doesn't suddenly start working after. I don't know about other states, but in California they are called "Welfare moms". It's such a common practice they already have their own little title.
The father has a right to be concerned with where his payments are going, and I think that kind of questioning is what actually makes a caring parent. If dad doesn't want to support mom's addictions, even if they are legal, he might want to seek another form of supporting his child. I once had a classmate whose father had worked a deal where he paid his mother her chid support in gift cards to places like the grocery store and clothing shops. It seems that was the only way he could be sure his money was't being spent on drugs, however, I doubt this is a common practice in most states.
 
As far as visitation goes, it is your legal right, EVEN if you aren't paying said child support to take them to court for denying you visitation. They are two totally separate issues. I tried to deny Heather's father seeing her until he paid up (at the time he was over 5,000 delinquent on support). Anyway, the judge threatened to hold me in contempt of court and throw me in jail if I ever denied Mitch from seeing her again. Needless to say, it was pretty ugly for a few years there. It got so bad we were court ordered to go to a Moderator. Long story and not gonna dig up the past. We get along now, we always kept our issues pretty much away from Heather. I'm sure she heard yelling at some points, but what can you do.
 
Kat said:
I made my comment from his feedback about his ex wife. Please read it. There is obviously more to the story than it being hypothecal.
Click to expand...
my wife doesnt work. she has custody over the child and maybe its best that she does have custody. however, that doesnt make her any different when it comes to providing. she lives off of the state and support. in opinion, it may seem ok for that to happen, but when your on the short end of the stick and having to create money to support the child, it becomes to be a different point of view. its easy to sit there and watch over a child(no, dont take this the wrong way as to think im saying raising a kid is easy because i know it isnt), and take in money that is coming from sources that you dont have to work for. in the meantime, the custodial parent will use the "i have to take care of and watch over this child. thats hard in itself" type of attitude. ok, use that. its a legit reason. i guess. but, it wouldnt be that legit of a reason if the payer took part in the raising as well.
so, in my situation, i pay money, dont get to see the child, the mother lives free and uses that excuse. it doesnt go over well with me how that seems to work out. i would love to watch over my child as a 50/50 share in the raising of my son and pay my support. but for this to be anywhere as equal, the mother has to make her money as well instead of relying from outside sources that she doesnt work for
 
Again, I understand what you're saying. She's a deadbeat in your opinion. The thing is, you still need to help pay for your son. If you wondering how the support is being spent, then I would suggest taking her to court.

When Mitch and I had our few years of court dates, neither of us had attorneys. We did our own court papers (you can pick these up at your local courthouse; I sure it's like that in every state), and we would turn in said papers and get dates to show up in court. It was totally free.

If you are being denied visitation, then I strongly suggest you checking into this. Don't bitch about something you aren't willing to fight for.
 
Kat said:
As far as visitation goes, it is your legal right, EVEN if you aren't paying said child support to take them to court for denying you visitation. They are two totally separate issues. I tried to deny Heather's father seeing her until he paid up (at the time he was over 5,000 delinquent on support). Anyway, the judge threatened to hold me in contempt of court and throw me in jail if I ever denied Mitch from seeing her again. Needless to say, it was pretty ugly for a few years there. It got so bad we were court ordered to go to a Moderator. Long story and not gonna dig up the past. We get along now, we always kept our issues pretty much away from Heather. I'm sure she heard yelling at some points, but what can you do.
Click to expand...
i know i am given the right to see the child. for a while, it was a good relationship between me and the mother. but making a complicated story short, it has turned bad....again. basically, my life turns to shit if i cause waves of any kind. by this, i mean that if she gets upset, it gets ugly. very ugly. to reiterate more, she will make false accusations that will in turn cause me to be forbidden to see the child unless its supervised visitation by a case worker.
it can almost be said that shes a little on the mental end. but i would say that she gets revenge. her character type is very strong willed and she doesnt let herself get beat. so, if i try to enforce the custody, some out of the blue story gets brought up that will forbid me to see my son indefinately. i have to walk on eggshells till i can get something done about this.
 
Well, all I can say to that, is you married her, you created a son together, and you do what you have to do to see your son.

For an example of mine:

As I said, I won't go into all the gory details about Heather's father, but let's just say I wasn't treated very well. I stayed with him til Heather was 5, and then it was basically I needed to leave or I'd end up dead eventually. Now, Mitch is a totally different person now after years of counseling, but it was bad back then.

Anyway, when Heather was 9 she needed braces. Another thing I had to totally pay for btw. So Heather goes to Mitch and Deanna's for the weekend and the dumb bitch of a girlfriend gives my daughter tootsie rolls of all things all weekend long. The next time I took her to the dentist, guess who got reamed for her braces being such a mess? That's just one example.

You just have to go with the flow and deal with it the best you can until your child is 18. The bottom line is, being a figure in your childs life and helping to provide for your baby, no matter what you have to endure with the "ex" while said child is growing up. And let me tell ya, as I'm sure Kiere probably can also and any other "exes" reading this thread, it's not always easy. You just have to keep thinking and mebbe even saying out loud to yourself, I love my child, and whatever I put up with and whatever grief I go thru, it's for them.
 
Kat said:
Again, I understand what you're saying. She's a deadbeat in your opinion. The thing is, you still need to help pay for your son. If you wondering how the support is being spent, then I would suggest taking her to court.

When Mitch and I had our few years of court dates, neither of us had attorneys. We did our own court papers (you can pick these up at your local courthouse; I sure it's like that in every state), and we would turn in said papers and get dates to show up in court. It was totally free.

If you are being denied visitation, then I strongly suggest you checking into this. Don't bitch about something you aren't willing to fight for.
Click to expand...
i totally agree. like i said at the start, people need to provide for what they create. and i do. but if you look past the mother, father, and child for a second and look to see how the state responds to things, that is what my concerns are about mostly. this is regardless of which parent has custody.
i dont agree with everything that my state deligates as their process when it comes to CS.
if they want the payer to work and provide money, they should look at alternatives to get them to work instead of the jail cell. with that said, if the payer is down on their luck, help them get established to get them going again to be at the point to where they were before they stopped paying. IE: help them get a job, help them with transportation, set them up with temp housing, etc.
unfortunately the only example i can refer to is my own. its the only one i know well. since i moved to orlando, i dont know anyone here. so, i cant rely on people to take me places. to get a mode of travel, i had to look to my family to do this. but if you think about it, not everyone has family they can turn to for help on little things.
little things may not seem like they could be a huge damper on a situation, but they have the ability to be. you would be surprised. ive been there and lived it. im still living it atm in a sense.
basically, i have to float money here and there to pay for a residence to live in and support cost of living. eventually, it will catch up. and i can hear it now, "your thinking about yourself". and your right, i need to survive as well. if i dont survive and become a homeless person that cant hold a job because of appearance standards that businesses hold, then what? a person will go to jail.

i want to reiterate that a vast majority of this is hypothetical to keep a debate going. i like debating because its a way to get 2 parties to see different sides of a story/situation.
 
Kat said:
Well, all I can say to that, is you married her, you created a son together, and you do what you have to do to see your son.

For an example of mine:

As I said, I won't go into all the gory details about Heather's father, but let's just say I wasn't treated very well. I stayed with him til Heather was 5, and then it was basically I needed to leave or I'd end up dead eventually. Now, Mitch is a totally different person now after years of counseling, but it was bad back then.

Anyway, when Heather was 9 she needed braces. Another thing I had to totally pay for btw. So Heather goes to Mitch and Deanna's for the weekend and the dumb bitch of a girlfriend gives my daughter tootsie rolls of all things all weekend long. The next time I took her to the dentist, guess who got reamed for her braces being such a mess? That's just one example.

You just have to go with the flow and deal with it the best you can until your child is 18. The bottom line is, being a figure in your childs life and helping to provide for your baby, no matter what you have to endure with the "ex" while said child is growing up. And let me tell ya, as I'm sure Kiere probably can also and any other "exes" reading this thread, it's not always easy. You just have to keep thinking and mebbe even saying out loud to yourself, I love my child, and whatever I put up with and whatever grief I go thru, it's for them.
Click to expand...

yes, its true that you do what you have to do to be part of the childs life, but what you dont understand is that whe WILL come up with some bs story that will put me in jail and at the same time tie it in with a way to keep him from me indefinitely.
but, unless i want a record for somethign i didnt do, and to have the ability to see my son ever, to be taken away, then yes, ill fight it. but until i can get an idea of how to approach this without any of that happening, then ill fight tooth and nail for it. this is currently in the process btw
 
Okay, I understand what you're saying, but the reason why the state has gone to such extreems now, is because they HAD to get tough from the deadbeats Dad's of the past. And yes guys, it was the DADS who made the states you live in pass such laws. If they had been paying in the first place, it wouldn't have come to the extreem it's at. That is the bottom line.

So don't blame the system, blame the fathers of children in the past who had to make it bad for the fathers of today.
 
back onto topic now....stating stories is great. but there is alot of people that are thinking im not paying support. i want it to be known that i am. i made this thread because it has the potential to be a good debate when it comes to the way a state handles the people that dont pay.
should there be programs to help people that are having a hard time paying, yet they want to/prefer to pay.
how to deal with those that dont pay because they dont want to but have the means to.

keep in mind, its not only men that are the payer. its apparent that when it comes to CS, the male is already generalized as being the payer. its been proven already in this thread.
 
Kat said:
Okay, I understand what you're saying, but the reason why the state has gone to such extreems now, is because they HAD to get tough from the deadbeats Dad's of the past. And yes guys, it was the DADS who made the states you live in pass such laws. If they had been paying in the first place, it wouldn't have come to the extreem it's at. That is the bottom line.

So don't blame the system, blame the fathers of children in the past who had to make it bad for the fathers of today.
Click to expand...

why is it seen as the "father" that hasnt paid. women pay support too
 
masterorion said:
why is it seen as the "father" that hasnt paid. women pay support too
Click to expand...

I will just about guarantee you, that even as long as 10 years ago 99% of the non-custodial parent was male. Hell, I'll go so far as to say even up to 5 years ago, 99% of the non-custodial parent NOT paying support was male.
 
Kat said:
Okay, I understand what you're saying, but the reason why the state has gone to such extreems now, is because they HAD to get tough from the deadbeats Dad's of the past. And yes guys, it was the DADS who made the states you live in pass such laws. If they had been paying in the first place, it wouldn't have come to the extreem it's at. That is the bottom line.

So don't blame the system, blame the fathers of children in the past who had to make it bad for the fathers of today.
Click to expand...

also, when it comes to a person that may have trouble paying, you can tell which ones want to pay and which ones dont. the ones that dont have a grievence paying will update the state with their residence and check in from time to time. the ones that have no intention of paying will avoid the state.
why not help the ones that seem to want to pay?

i feel that SOME of the rules set could be revised a little to look out for the welfare of all parties involved. but i see it as the state doesnt really care about all parties.
 
Again, blame the dads of the past for the laws of today. I'm sorry, but I wish to hell they had these laws while I was raising Heather. It's about time is all I have to say.

Furthermore, if you're paying your support and doin' what you're supposed to be doin' as far as your child is concernced, then you also should be looking at it as the law is good for the children who aren't getting the support from their fathers.
 
Kat said:
I will just about guarantee you, that even as long as 10 years ago 99% of the non-custodial parent was male. Hell, I'll go so far as to say even up to 5 years ago, 99% of the non-custodial parent NOT paying support was male.
Click to expand...
its true that very few percentage of female have to pay support. that is a whole different debate as to why the women automatically get the custody...that we will save for another time.
anyhow, there are still female that do not pay support as well. its a low number because of the numbers involved. very few women are non custodial. thats why the percents are the way they are.
 
Kat said:
Again, blame the dads of the past for the laws of today. I'm sorry, but I wish to hell they had these laws while I was raising Heather. It's about time is all I have to say.

Furthermore, if you're paying your support and doin' what you're supposed to be doin' as far as your child is concernced, then you also should be looking at it as the law is good for the children who aren't getting the support from their fathers.
Click to expand...
the rules and actions of the state still dont create support for the child tho. it just punishes people that dont pay. it doesnt make revenue magically appear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top