Child Support

[childsupport]

After reading many of the listings pertaining to child support issues I can come to only 1 conclusion, we need help!! It is said that 24,000 men a year has been said to commit suicide due to the powerlessness they feel from the effects of their support obligations. Many of these obligations are offensive. There is a recurring theme of the threads I have read in here about child support and that is that the system is flawed. It is said, "the system is not perfect." That is a cop-out. Just as the non-custodial parent needs to take responsibility for their child the system needs to take responsibility for the faults. The courts and judgments are biased and their collection tactics are ludicrous, we can't collect the money that is owed so let's suspend all licensing and make it impossible to pay. The only ones who seem to be winning in these matters are the lawyers. We are advocates for those that are damaged due to unfair court orders regarding child support The circumstances of an initial unfair order can instantly take a person homeless making it even more difficult to pay. Attorneys won't take the case without the money part of the agreement...Thousands of men skip the country every year, as well, to get out of the suffocating circumstances.The snowball grows and grows until it is so overwhelming that it seems that there is no help. We are fighting these things alone. We are overpowered and out numbered. The initial statement is "dead beat" I am sorry but to dehumanize someone is a characteristic of war. Now that they are known as dead beats they are no longer human and we can attack them without feeling. It is time that we join forces to find the balance between greed and the welfare of the child!! Individually we don't stand a chance. Together we can find the solutions that will be feasible for all parties concerned. Those that are collecting these unfair orders are not benefiting when the order can't be met. No one is the winner until livable terms can be met....We are not attorneys and cannot offer legal advice. We are others that have been subject to the damages of an unfair order. We welcome all that want to find reasonable solutions to these matters. Fathers, Mothers, Grandparents, the more the merrier, As a citizen of the U.S. this is a concern....Send us an E-mail with a brief summary of your interest and we will get back to you.

 

[barbie77]

Personally I think that child support is flawed. I don't believe it should be based on the NCP's income. I think its insane to think that a child could ever cost $1000 a month to raise!! And there are people out there that spend many of thousands a MONTH because of their income. For one, if you decide that you want to be the custodial parent then you have agreed to rasie and take care of the child. You should also be resposible for the majority of the cost!!! Being as YOU were the one that chose to have custody of the child...and for that matter were probably the one that chose to give birth to it. Being as more woman have custody than men from what I've seen. I think they should come up with a generic how much does it cost monthly on average to rase a child. Not how much of Dads income can we get. In an example of joint shared custody. Shouldn't the expenses be "shared" as well. What I've personally seen in this example of joint shared custody is where Mom is getting like $500+ a month for the child and dad is paying the support for when the child is with mom and then he has to pay for the chid when he gets her! THAT IS FLAWED!!! This is all just my opinion! I needed to vent!

 

[Karen1971]

Barbie, I won't comment on several things you said b/c your thought process seems lacking (with regard to the custodial parent being solely responsible for a child).

Unfortunately, there are so many different circumstances that play into child support, the system feels it's doing the best that it can. Is it flawed? Absolutely. But for every male that cries injustice, there are just as many mothers out there taking care of their children w/out any financial or emotional help. How is there justice for them?

 

[barbie77]

Barbie, I won't comment on several things you said b/c your thought process seems lacking (with regard to the custodial parent being solely responsible for a child).

Unfortunately, there are so many different circumstances that play into child support, the system feels it's doing the best that it can. Is it flawed? Absolutely. But for every male that cries injustice, there are just as many mothers out there taking care of their children w/out any financial or emotional help. How is there justice for them?

First of all didn't you say you werent going to comment?:yes:...Second I DO NOT think that the custodial parent should be SOLELY responsible for a child. In fact I said no such thing. I believe, and this is my opinion, that if you've been given the choice to have the child and be the custodial parent you should assume MAJORITY not ALL of the financial support. Especially when the father isn't a "dead beat" and would happily be the custodial parent and the mother has chosen to be the primary care giver. The custodial parent has chosen to be the primary care giver so in turn they should be. It only makes logical sence to me.

As far as the mothers taking care of their children without any financial or emotional help well if they havent sought any then there is no injustice being done to them. They have every right to get some financial help! But they shouldn't be getting support payment equivalent to a full time job! As far as emotional support well nobodys life is fair and no court can do anything about that one....

 

[Proserpina]

Regardless of who has custody, the child deserves to be supported equally by BOTH parents. The bone of contention seems to be from where this support is derived. What's CP's time worth, for example? Should that be compensated?

And for Barbie, here's a breakdown:

Let's see how easy it is to spend $1000/month on a child.

(I live in WA, so I'm using these figures based upon averages - and for the sake of this discussion, there are two of us here. Me and kiddo)

Rent/mortgage: 1300
Utilities: 300
Car payment: 250
Health ins: 400
Food: 400
Diapers/sundries: 300
Gas, car ins: 250

Already we're up to over $1000/month each...see where I'm going here?

 

[Antigone]

Personally I think that child support is flawed. I don't believe it should be based on the NCP's income. I think its insane to think that a child could ever cost $1000 a month to raise!! And there are people out there that spend many of thousands a MONTH because of their income. For one, if you decide that you want to be the custodial parent then you have agreed to rasie and take care of the child. You should also be resposible for the majority of the cost!!! Being as YOU were the one that chose to have custody of the child...and for that matter were probably the one that chose to give birth to it. Being as more woman have custody than men from what I've seen. I think they should come up with a generic how much does it cost monthly on average to rase a child. Not how much of Dads income can we get. In an example of joint shared custody. Shouldn't the expenses be "shared" as well. What I've personally seen in this example of joint shared custody is where Mom is getting like $500+ a month for the child and dad is paying the support for when the child is with mom and then he has to pay for the chid when he gets her! THAT IS FLAWED!!! This is all just my opinion! I needed to vent!

Where the heck are OG, SilverPlum, BlueMeanie, TheGeekess, Isis1, & CyJeff when you need tham

 

[Proserpina]

Where the heck are OG, SilverPlum, BlueMeanie, TheGeekess, Isis1, & CyJeff when you need tham

Indeed

 

[BayState]

Where the heck are OG, SilverPlum, BlueMeanie, TheGeekess, Isis1, & CyJeff when you need tham

I'm here. This thread is just too flippin' stupid to post advice on. I will leave the "advice" to Barbi...After all, anyone named "barbi" "knows" what she is talking about...Right??

 

[barbie77]

LOL this is my opinion only...

As far as the $1000 a month support example I dont feel that the support payer should be resposible for the other parents entire mortage payment, car payment, the whole households food. Children that I've raised DO NOT eat $400 worth of food in a month....if so thats one obese child! Or someones buying steaks every night! The support should go to raising the child not supporting the mother!! To often thats what it is!

What does everyone have to say about parents that are famous or even semi famous that pay many thousands a month! What, you think it costs several thousands a month to raise a child. NO! There is no reason for it! That is where the system is flawed.

Also the comment about the CP's time being compensated. A lot of the time the NCP would love to be the CP so really in my opinion no it shouldn't be compensated. Not only is the CP getting the joy out of being the primary parent but also the joy outta the check to "raise" the child they shouldn't also get paid for being the victor in the custody battle!

LOL! oh yeah is anyone even going to comment on childsupports opinon or is mine the only one everyone feels like commenting on...

 

[irish223]

LOL this is my opinion only...

As far as the $1000 a month support example I dont feel that the support payer should be resposible for the other parents entire mortage payment, car payment, the whole households food. Children that I've raised DO NOT eat $400 worth of food in a month....if so thats one obese child! Or someones buying steaks every night! The support should go to raising the child not supporting the mother!! To often thats what it is!

What does everyone have to say about parents that are famous or even semi famous that pay many thousands a month! What, you think it costs several thousands a month to raise a child. NO! There is no reason for it! That is where the system is flawed.

Also the comment about the CP's time being compensated. A lot of the time the NCP would love to be the CP so really in my opinion no it shouldn't be compensated. Not only is the CP getting the joy out of being the primary parent but also the joy outta the check to "raise" the child they shouldn't also get paid for being the victor in the custody battle!

LOL! oh yeah is anyone even going to comment on childsupports opinon or is mine the only one everyone feels like commenting on...

One of the reasons for child support is so that the child(ren) will have a standard of living that is as close as possible to what it would have been had the parents stayed together. This is actually written in Illinois code, as well as a few other states. THAT'S one reason it's based on a percentage of income.

Isn't that the way it should be? Wouldn't ANY parent want his/her child to live as comfortably as he/she does? (No snickers please )

Oh, and, I'll comment on childsupport's post too. Although there may be a few kernels of truth in the post, most of it is sensationalism based on unsubstantiated claims. Besides, it's really just an ad.

 

[Proserpina]

Barbie, you're missing the point.

And you completely misread my post.

 

[barbie77]

sorry if I misread your post. I just think its sad that a lot of the time from what I've seen with my friends and family the child doesn't get any benifit out of it and all the money that is supposed to be for supporting the child is only supporting mom. In my husbands particular example Mom freeloads at her mothers house having her pay for everything for her and uses hundreds of childsupport dollars for drinking and drugs. Thats how I think the system is flawed. That shouldn't be aloud to happen. I like the fact that the NCP does have to provide support. I just think sometimes it gets out of hand. Also what about when the CP gets married. They now have someone else also supporting them and that spouse chose to be the the CP with kids. I think the NCP should still have to pay support but not as much when the CP gets married. Just what I think.

 

[Karen1971]

Why would a new spouse be required to pay for YOUR husband's child? That's like saying YOU should have to pay more for your husband's child because he now has two incomes, since he's married to you (doesn't seem fair, does it)?

It sounds like your situation is an unfair one, but that doesn't mean that it is for everyone else. If your husband feels he's being so taken advantage of, and if, in fact mom is a drug user and he can prove it, maybe he needs to petition the court for more visitation and/or shared visitation and have his child support adjusted (if they give him more visitation and/or custody).

 

[Proserpina]

sorry if I misread your post. I just think its sad that a lot of the time from what I've seen with my friends and family the child doesn't get any benifit out of it and all the money that is supposed to be for supporting the child is only supporting mom. In my husbands particular example Mom freeloads at her mothers house having her pay for everything for her and uses hundreds of childsupport dollars for drinking and drugs. Thats how I think the system is flawed. That shouldn't be aloud to happen. I like the fact that the NCP does have to provide support. I just think sometimes it gets out of hand. Also what about when the CP gets married. They now have someone else also supporting them and that spouse chose to be the the CP with kids. I think the NCP should still have to pay support but not as much when the CP gets married. Just what I think.

If the NCP would like to pay less after CP remarries, perhaps NCP would prefer to sign over rights and allow New Spouse to adopt the child?

And why do you believe one parent gets to "choose" whether they'll be the CP or not? It's usually (sadly) a judge who decides that.

 

[barbie77]

Im just saying that if CP remarry's then they would need less income to support themselves. Children hardly need more than a couple hundred a month in their needs. From what I see the support helps the CP take care of paying for things around the house being as a lot of the time they're single parents. If they're not single parents then they shouldnt need as much of the NCP's money to live. I seriously dont think children dont take that many hundreds a month to raise.

As far as the "choosing" to be the custodial parent. I've seen lots of CP's that the NCP would gladly take over being the primary care giver. Take my husbands situation for example. In a heart beat he would take up being the CP! The only reason he isn't is because the can't prove what all is going on yet. But the mother has chosen to be the CP. She could easily give over her primary custody to the father. So the cp DOES have a choice. The judge decides when it comes to custody battles but even if the judge decides the cp could a lot of the time choose to give over their custody to the other parent(unless the other parent is unfit of situations like that). It is a choice to be a parent. If they've chosen to be the primery parent then they should be the primary financialy resposible one as well.

Also in my husbands situation the mother has already stated in court when asked why the child should primarily live with her she said she was there to get custody officialy established so she can still get her benifits from the state and child support. Basically the only reason she has chosen to be the cp is to receive her child support! Thats messed up! Maybe my husbands situation could be contributing to my personal opinions on CS.

 

[Proserpina]

Im just saying that if CP remarry's then they would need less income to support themselves. Children hardly need more than a couple hundred a month in their needs. From what I see the support helps the CP take care of paying for things around the house being as a lot of the time they're single parents. If they're not single parents then they shouldnt need as much of the NCP's money to live. I seriously dont think children dont take that many hundreds a month to raise.

I'm raising one. I guarantee it costs FAR more than a couple of hundred bucks a month - cripes, I've spent more than that on diapers!

As far as the "choosing" to be the custodial parent. I've seen lots of CP's that the NCP would gladly take over being the primary care giver. Take my husbands situation for example. In a heart beat he would take up being the CP! The only reason he isn't is because the can't prove what all is going on yet. But the mother has chosen to be the CP. She could easily give over her primary custody to the father. So the cp DOES have a choice. The judge decides when it comes to custody battles but even if the judge decides the cp could a lot of the time choose to give over their custody to the other parent(unless the other parent is unfit of situations like that). It is a choice to be a parent. If they've chosen to be the primery parent then they should be the primary financialy resposible one as well.

Also in my husbands situation the mother has already stated in court when asked why the child should primarily live with her she said she was there to get custody officialy established so she can still get her benifits from the state and child support. Basically the only reason she has chosen to be the cp is to receive her child support! Thats messed up! Maybe my husbands situation could be contributing to my personal opinions on CS.

I think your viewpoint is certainly influenced by your husband's situation - because I honestly don't think you're seeing this clearly at all.

 

[army judge]

Hmmm, I just had a thought.
If you want to avoid child support, just don't have children.
This, after all, is the 21st century.
Pregnancy can be avoided, and it doesn't have to involve abortion.

If you do decide to have children, don't get divorced.
You could work on your marriage and being a good parent.
Otherwise, if you have children (out of wedlock) or get divorced, you will have child support issues.
You will be required to pay child support or try to collect it from an unwilling payer.

I'll editorialize now.
If I ever found myself dealing with these issues, I'd just go it alone.
Sometimes you have to know when to cut your losses.
You are often better off without toxic people in your life.
If adults are unable to choose their mates wisely, teenagers are even more disadvantaged.
That is why I adamantly opposed to teenagers engaging in sexual activities.

 

[barbie77]

Hey you're all entitled to your own opinion and you can all think yours is right. My opinion is the system is flawed. I'm going to keep that opinion. Thanks for all the input.

 

[childsupport]

Flawed

I agree that the system is flawed and in all honesty I don't believe that many would argue that point. They will however sit back and criticize without taking an active part, mostly because it doesn't involve them directly. In the declaration of independence it speaks of when we as citizens see such flaws not only do we have the moral responsibility to fix the issues but we have a social contractual obligation. The system seems to be declaring "WAR" on many of the individuals with child support orders. The first act of war is to dehumanize the enemy. We may call them (pardon me) gooks, commi bastards, socialist pigs, or even dead beats. Then we begin to cut off their supplies by baricades or what not, maybe we will take away their ability to work by taking licensing. Now they can't provide for themselves or the child declared in the order. The formula that is used may be becoming more refined but I have heard of many with 1 child at $12.00 an hour paying $250 a month and then there is me at $500 a month. I have called health and welfare for modifications and over the phone was called a dead beat. I began in the arrears $4500 so 60% of my check was garnished. That was 60% of my gross and that doesn't seem to be a standard practice either. I was left with a weekly check of $130 try paying rent with that. I went homeless instantly...I tried for modifications and for a year and a half the paperwork was lost repeatedly. Did I mention that the mother of the child works for child support collections? She has said that she looks up the file that gives her information that she is not entitled to but though I have reported the conflict of interest they assure me that they wilol look into it and apparently nothing is done. Of course, her mother is a supervisor. Now I am facing federal charges, I have been homeless most of my adult life, 14 years, and as I have returned to school they want to strike me with that. I was not permitted to see this child. In fact her mother told her that her dad was dead. Then once she discovered that I was alive she scared her with other lies. The child has been sexually abused in the care of her mother I knew nothing of this and couldn't do anything anyway because not too many homeless people have money for a lawyer. It is supposed to be for the welfare of the child but what about this sounds like that was the concern? I want to fix the system so others don't have to contend with all that I have due to this but there is a part of me that wants justice or even vengence on her and the one sided, biased, affairs of the governing bodies.