My point was that providing housing for two of three people other than herself may be "living outside her means" but also necessary. Living in a one bedroom apartment with two kids ain't a good idea either for example. Alternatively, one could look at the monthy charge as just an average for annual expenses, in which case the particular month's situation is irrelevant. Still, I agree it's a pretty rigged system.
I here what you are saying Rhad about having to buy a bigger house. That is why I tried pointing out in the my last post how the finances actually swing in her favor more than she gets in the child support when the kids are away for months at a time.
This is the funniest thing I have ever read. You talk about dads that get screwed as those it was the norm. To take a phrase from you...pfff..it isn't. Spend a couple of years working in this system. It changed my entire view of child support. Perhaps you don't care what kind of neighborhood the kids live in. Maybe you do. I don't know you. I do know that you are bitter. The Dad that does not care about where his kids live as long as it isn't his financial problem is exactly the reason we have support laws. When I was working in a law office that dealt in family law, I could retire if I had a dollar for every time I heard "I'm not gonna pay that b**** anything." Deadbeat dads are rampant. Wanna blame somebody? Blame all those guys that just wanted to screw somebody without a condom and go their merry way without doing anything to support their kids.
If my kids only cost 1500 bucks a month to support, I would be ecstatic. Day care for a baby is 1K a month alone.
Well, yeah true.... Its like A guy in school wants to impress the class by spraying graffiti on the principal's door A girl in school wants to impress the class by spraying graffiti on the principal's door The guy gets 100 hours detention The girl gets 25 hours detention You can say "reap what you sew" and behave correctly. And the should. But the consequences still seem a bit uneven. Arent women taking a blind leap of faith choosing a bad boy who might not pay? Women are allowed to delude themselves into thinking they found eternal love, though the guy is supposed to do all the character evaluation? "Girl get AWAY from him, he's NO good for you" "Oh wait, so you're having his child? Get that LOSER! He has to MAN UP." How does he go from being the guy with all the red flags to the guy they let conceive a child with them? Women are superwomen and want equality. They want YOUR job. Once baby hits, they're back to naive fragile gentle and tender with a 12 year old's innocence and unknowing. Come ON, its a scam lol. Its not about one-sidedness. Just tip the scales a liiiittle (** for the guys who actually try and the women who obviously didnt try)
Reading through this thread is thoroughly depressing. It sounds like we're talking about houseplants instead of children. Makes me sad.
What exactly is funny and what does ^ that mean...perhaps you should read the entire thread, or at least my earlier comments and use spellcheck...Dads that pay and have always paid tend to get screwed by their ex's...All the ex has to do is not give up the kids for a weekend, not let the kids speak to you when you call, threaten to take you to court so now you have to waste time and money, just because she didn't get her way and got PO'd...and what can I do about it? Take her to court to waste more time and money on lawyers that could be used for the kids... Actually it was pfft, you obviously have trouble reading... I pay a crap load of money in child support, it allows them to live in a great neighborhod, in the house I built...if i didn't care I would have made her sorry azz sell our house, but I thought of the kids and wanted them to have a stable, familiar environment to live in...Am I bitter, heck f'n yes I am...I was bent over a barrell and whenever she gets PO'd, who suffers, the kids...thus me... I think we have support laws for more reasons than that...You obviously don't have an ex that is a total B*tch, I envy you...you've probably never had kids and been divorced ...good for you...but to come in here and say "oh, I worked in a law office that dealt with family law"...pfft, so the fock what...Unless you've been in this situation, I find it hard to validate your statements with nothing more than my smartazz response... There are dead beat dads that don't take responsibility, they're A-holes...I never said I'm glad they do that...they are the ones that ruin it for the rest of the good dads that pay and are apart of their kids lives...It's those b*tches that take advantage of the system/situation that pisses me off...
I have paid child support and went through a tough divorce myself and still disagree that your situation is even close to the norm. You are basing your entire argument on your own situation. Very scientific. Next time you are speaking with the AG's office, ask them the percentage of women who do receive their payments.
My wife and I now have custody of my son. I still have to pay $950 a month even though we each have a kid but I don't care. I have my son and he is going to get the help that he needs. Great. Freaking. Success.
I don;t have children yet but, in my twisted mind, the burden would rest completely on the female. The male's contribution should not be expected. Consequently, females would be a lot more careful about the state of their body + i believe most men would step up. (putting down the bong...)
I did. Your allusion that dads getting screwed is the norm is simply laughable. It is far more often that the mother is the one on the business end of the screwjob. Well...yeah. Interfering with child custody is a serious crime and the judge could very well lock her up for it. Your time with the kids also is an Order of the Court, just like child support is. If you don't pay her the ordered support, she will have to file a Motion for Enforcement...unless she wants to wait the forever and a day it takes for the AG to do anything about it. If she refuses to let you have the kids, you can take her to court for her contempt of the court's order. Judges do not like it when their orders are disobeyed. Sorry to hear that. I really am. I do not want you to think that your situation is the norm. Or you could understand that I have seen more child support battles and situations than I care to enumerate. If I never litigate another one of those, it will be too soon. I really don't care if you find it hard to validate my statements. I have been an unbiased, rational observer with many of these. You haven't. If you had, you would see why the system is in place. Sadly, there are so many non-payment situations that most judges assume the dad will not pay until he proves otherwise.
Not politically correct, but food for thought.... although, the easiest solution would be to take control and wear a condom...
REf, That sounds real jazzy and all, but if you have ever been in the situation you would understand that nobody cares about enforcing visitation. They are only concerned with passing the buck. Look up how many people the state employs to enforce or deal with child support in any way, and then look up the same for visitation enforcement. Then get back to me. There is no comparison. Nobody cares about the visitation court order. As I said earlier, I had the papers in my hand standing next to my ex and kids with a cop, and he said he could not do anything unless she voluntarily handed them over, since she was the custodial parent. That order is worthless, and good luck trying to get it back in court. I have posted in the past about my ex leaving the state without telling me, and me having no access to my kids. When I was able to talk to someone, they basically said since she already moved there was nothing they could do. She was not obligated to help get the kids back or even give them to me in her state for my weekend. You litterally know nothing on this and are arguing with people who have lived it, and just spouting the company lines. I know you are because the, "judges do not like it when people disobey their orders" and "they can lock her up" were exactly what I was told at the time. Good Luck with that. See how far that gets you.
Look, I have a lot of sympathy for you. I read your previous post and I understand your frustration. What I don't like is the way you think your own situation reflects how it is in general, and you are wrong about Refman if you believe what he's doing doesn't make him intimately informed on the subject. During one part of her career, my significant other worked with children and mothers from around the state, trying to improve the condition of those less fortunate than a lot of us. She found out a heck of a lot. Far more women are the victims in these situations. Yes, you have had it rough, but I think it's tragic that there has to be a dialogue that paints a picture assuming that child support is somehow set up to benefit the woman/mother at the expense of the father. What you have gone through, and it's an absolute bummer that you have, is more the exception than the rule, not that the fact helps you much.
