It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why does it always have to be about money?

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 01:49 AM
link   
So out to dinner the other night with some friends and acquaintances. Usual chit-chat, jokes, state of the nation stuff etc.

The conversation took a turn when one of the women present, a recent single mother turned the conversation to her ex and the current state of affairs between him, her and their four year old child.

At the moment he is only working part time, and up until recently was only having his son a day at a time. Whatever his reasons were for this were his own, not my place to judge.

Now she's always been pretty demeaning of him since the split, he has no interest in his son, he doesn't care, he's moved on, the usual stuff. The problem with this kind of thing is if you only ever hear one side of the side of the story, it could well just be a case of sour grapes or even outright bitchiness.

So she's going on about how he now wants his son one night a week. My reasoning for this, although I don't say it out loud is to perhaps ease his son into dad and mum's new single life, or perhaps she is right, he isn't that interested. Who knows. Having been there myself, that initial transition is a difficult one for kids to process and adapt to, although they do it surprisingly well.

So then she blurts out about money. It seems he was paying around $40 a month in child support, which she gleefully took off him, citing the bastard should pay his way, he should be held accountable, blah blah blah. So now because he has rung child support, and they have lessened his payments to her as a result, she's up in arms about having less play money each week because her kid's dad is doing what she was bitching about him not doing in the first place.

Now I have to say at this point this girl is no angel herself. She frequents parties and bars, is in and out of various guys since and purportedly before the breakup, smokes and drinks like a train and a fish respectively. So not going to win mother of the year anytime soon. But the way she acts? The way she runs her ex down like he is some scumbag deadbeat? I've seen guys walk away from a woman the moment they mention pregnancy, guys who disappear and never have anything to do with their kids. One night a week? A few days here and there? Hell, at least he's making an effort...

But why is it that these women always boil it down to money? They seem to enjoy screwing every cent they can out of men, regardless of how much or how little they have to do with their kids after the fact. It's like it's not enough people have to deal with the pain, the nastiness and all the other BS that goes along with a breakup, men have to deal with this conniving, retaliatory, not to mention unnecessary fear of a woman still trying to control their lives or seeking revenge, by justifying hurting them financially through their kids?

Not to mention the impact on the kids it has. Kids see a lot more than people realise, and if you are trivialising their father as nothing more than an additional income source, then what does it say about you as a person? How will your son view this when he begins to understand what it is your are projecting about his dad?

I know for a fact the child support system in many countries is totally broken, and is extremely biased against men. The Family Law Courts even moreso. But there's absolutely no reason to boil the tatters of a relationship down to how much he is paying you at the end of the month.

If adults can't sit down together, and sort their # out in simple terms of what's best for the kids, both financially and emotionally, and not what's best for the revenge against the ex, or who should be screwed to the wall because you need that extra pack of smokes this week, then they really should be questioning their role as both parents and adults.




posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 02:00 AM
link   
a reply to: 74Templar

One of the many reasons why I am glad I never got anyone pregnant. I had two scares back in 06 but quick math settled that monstrosity. Time pregnant vs time #ed = impossible child.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 02:09 AM
link   
I remember when I was a kid my Dad had to pay 650 a month, then 800 and I lived with him Half the time. So that 40$/Mo is getting off like super #en easy. LOL


Why does being a (divorced)father equate to paying penalties? If that's the case, and it can turn ugly, I am more avert to not taking that risk. But the heart wants what the heart wants...

edit on 21-10-2014 by nrd101 because: added divorced



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 02:19 AM
link   
The mother of a four year old child shouldn't be out drinking at night.

Once you've had a kid, that kind of social life is over; hopefully the father will come to his senses and take the kid back from the bar hopping soon-to-be alcoholic.

She's probably just pissed because 'pregnant' didn't turn into 'gravy train'. Sorry, but that's what it looks like.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 02:23 AM
link   
a reply to: nrd101

That's the worst part to me, and i don't even know if it's right or not, only based on what she is saying.

Supposedly it's down to $32 a month, and she is screaming like she's lost her pay or something. i know initially I was paying $300 a month until my ex abandoned my daughter. I know guys who pay over $1000 a month and have their kids more than half.

The problem is child support (along with law courts police and just about anyone else) will automatically believe anything women say. Men by comparison are generally demonised by the system, not to mention their ex's.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 02:24 AM
link   
$40 a month and now it's less? I hope that was a typo.

The mistake I think your making is him paying her. She is not employed in the care of his child that he would pay her.

Normalcy is that two people have a child and each do their absolute best to provide the best they can for their child. That means time, money or whatever resources are needed. The problem seems to be people who run around whining about their own needs and rights rather than what is the best they can do for their child.

My parents were divorced when I was 13 and you might be surprised just how much children understand and what their feelings will be towards which parent as it is the children who generally go without at the expense of selfishness and adult childishness.

I wonder why you wouldn't judge him for taking his child only for a day as he obviously has his reasons, but you're judging her for wanting proper child support to feed, clothe and provide a home.

It comes down to money because that is what provides the necessities of life. Once you create a child in this world you have to feed and care for them and that requires money. People who don't care to do their best for their kids probably shouldn't be having them.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 02:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: meomy
$40 a month and now it's less? I hope that was a typo.


The minimum amount of a person earning the dole or benefits here is around $27 a month, about $7.50 a week. You don't need to tell me the system's broken, I already know. $7 a week isn't even enough for a lunch order here, much less anything else. That's just the government base here, what they work it out on. When I took my daughter on full time, I was asked if wanted to pursue child support. This was about 4 years ago and my sum total child support was $24.60 a month she had to pay. Me working full time? $313 a month.



Normalcy is that two people have a child and each do their absolute best to provide the best they can for their child. That means time, money or whatever resources are needed. The problem seems to be people who run around whining about their own needs and rights rather than what is the best they can do for their child.


Totally agree, which is the core of this rant. People should be putting all that personal # aside and looking at what the kid or kids need, rather than seeing child support or paying money to either party as a way to get revenge or to financially burden their ex.


My parents were divorced when I was 13 and you might be surprised just how much children understand and what their feelings will be towards which parent as it is the children who generally go without at the expense of selfishness and adult childishness.


I was a single dad to two girls for almost six years. I know just how much my kids understand what is going on, and sometimes it scares me. Luckily, they always come first, even if it means I go without as a result. And there were many many times that happened. When you're bitching because you can't afford that extra pack of cigarettes, that new tattoo, or that 10pack of Jim Beams coz daddy won't cough up the cash, it boils my blood.


I wonder why you wouldn't judge him for taking his child only for a day as he obviously has his reasons, but you're judging her for wanting proper child support to feed, clothe and provide a home.


Two differences here. I have been where he is now, and I understand somewhat his point of view. The problem is she isn't exactly short on cash courtesy of the government, while he works 20 hours a week and gets no assistance whatsoever. Plus she spends most of it getting wasted or smoking, while her mother and friends looks after the kid majority of the time. Besides, I don't really know the guy well, so judging his reasons would be unfair without all the facts. To me, he is making an effort to see his son. Just because he isn't there every waking second doesn't make him a deadbeat. To me, the money he gets from her is more about screwing him using the system and not providing for their son. So am I judgemental? Yeah, a bit.


It comes down to money because that is what provides the necessities of life. Once you create a child in this world you have to feed and care for them and that requires money.


You missed the point entirely here, although what you say is correct. It has nothing to do with either party being responsible. It has to do with both parties, the mother especially, thinking that hurting her ex financially, if for whatever reason is justified.


People who don't care to do their best for their kids probably shouldn't be having them.


No arguments there.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 03:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: 74Templar

It has to do with both parties, the mother especially, thinking that hurting her ex financially, if for whatever reason is justified.




Now there's an assumption if ever there was one!!!

You say quote "The mother especially" ....

WHY ?

You have gone to great lengths in your posts to stress "It has to do with

both parties? .....


Bottom line is any child needs - food, care, warmth and cloths as bare

essentials. not to mention that they grow out of clothes at a rate of knots.

and as you have already noted both parties are responsible.


Because she is being some what extravagant in front of you, you are making

a judgement on how she is spending 'her' money, whilst not knowing what she

may have done without to be doing so!


I wonder how many men would be as judgemental of the man when he is out

having a meal, or buying rounds of drinks in a bar!



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 04:10 AM
link   
Forty a month? It's been a very long time, but I paid something like $200.00 a week for eight years - and had only been allowed to see my son once in that entire period, right at the beginning of it. I paid directly to the "Child Support Recovery Unit" - which, at the time, was standard operating procedure in the county I lived in. Everyone in the county HAD to pay to them ( They got 15% ) and they would come after you with a fury if you were even a day late.

No matter how many times I tried to fight to see my son, I always walked out beaten.

Years later I found the reason why. My ex's new husband had legally adopted my son right after she and I split. She lived in a fairly small town and her father was in good with the local judge. So it all got covered up. I lived as a hostage to the Child Support system for eight years illegally - paying support to a child I could not see and who thought another man was his father.

Talk about angry when I finally discovered the whole truth!

The good news? Crows tend to come home to roost and now my son, who is 24, knows the truth and he and I have begun to build a solid and good relationship with one another. To that end, the eight years of paying means nothing to me anymore.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 04:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide

I hear you. The Child Support system is broken here too. Here, they go after people with the same rigor, to the point where they can legally fleece your pay before you even see it. Your rate of payments is worked out on your gross earnings, not the net earnings, so the payments are always higher. And god forbid should you fall behind, they take their cut plus interest, which goes to whom? Not your ex or your child, right into their pockets.

It's also the same here in terms of visitation rights. Unless you are prepared to go to family law court and have an agreement drafted by a lawyer, which costs around $5000-$8000 dollars, then the primary carer, usually the mother can cut you off. It took 8 months and four court appearances to have a custody agreement settled between my ex and I, and the judge still told me I was a bad person for not trying my hardest to track my ex down, even though she'd completely disappeared for almost three years.

My ex in the beginning was the same, using my child as a weapon to 'keep me in line' as she said it herself. If I didn't pay when she wanted and how much, then she took off taking my daughter with her. I went three months without seeing her at one stage, while child support cleaned me out a third of my pay every week. I think she finally realised at one stage being more reasonable got better results, and the relationship is now steady.

Look, at the end of the day, this thread is not about men not paying their dues, although I expect it will be steered down this path. All men should be responsible for what they create. What gives me the utter #s is when women look at their once partner and decide they can hurt him by both using the child and crippling him financially as a form of revenge. That part of it is what really struck me about this particular woman's ramblings. That it was more about getting even or hurting him by using the system to crush him. That when things don't go their way, they cry the victim as though the system should only be supporting them. If the shoe was on the other foot, I'd be pretty sure it'd be a 'that's not fair, he should pay' scenario.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 06:35 AM
link   
because 2 things matter in this system we´ve created love and money and neither is much use without the other



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 06:41 AM
link   
a reply to: 74Templar

Well, while I would say that monetary concerns are secondary to the issue of an absent father, my father left my mother when I was sixteen or so, roughly in the midst of me trying to take my end of school exams, the ones which are supposed to set one up for the future, and shortly thereafter disowned my sister and myself as well. He has not fulfilled his fiduciary duties toward us, as agreed during the divorce, and now, at the age of 29 and having no savings, no proper income worth a crap despite working like a dog, I am beginning to realise just how much that situation has held me back.

Life happens, and although I am no where near where I thought I would be by this point in my life, I am coping, surviving. Thing is, whether the mother, or the father are at fault, if either one is a psychopath they can pretty much get away with whatever they want to, when ever they want to, and no one either has the ability to do anything about it, or the will to.

In the specific situation you refer to, it does sound a little fishy on the ladies part, but you never know what lead there unless you were actually privy to all that went on between the two during the divorce, both sides. It could be that her apparently mercenary attitude has its root in some psychological abuse she suffered under the auspices of her former spouse, or she could just be a giant she beast from hell? Who can say unless they were there for the whole drama?



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 06:52 AM
link   
My X put me through hell with my son. He did not want to spend any time with him at all. He would call on Friday at 4pm when he was supposed to pick him up for a week end and cancel. My son loved his father and looked forward to spending time with him. I lied to my Son, I made excuses for his father, always prefaced with "Your Dad really wanted to spend this week end with you, but.......". I did not ever bad mouth my son's father to him, it is morally wrong, to make a child feel he or she has to choose who to love and be loyal to.

Not all women put money first. Child support helped me taking an income drop of 40k +, and still I had to say "no" to many things my son asked for, that we could not afford.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 07:55 AM
link   
The main reason it is all about money is because that is the only way she can still punish her ex.
That or do her best to not let the father see the kids, but some dad's don't care about that.
These women are in what I call the jaded wives club.
On the other side are the men complaining that she's bleeding him dry. Boo hoo.
They both seem to forget that you chose each other in the first place so make better decisions. It take two to tango.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 07:59 AM
link   
a reply to: 74Templar

I did not/could not read that whole thing lol These types of stories just grind my gears, just so cynical and unnecessary and I just end up feeling sorry for the child. I wonder what the mother tells her child about the father, if she calls him stupid then she is calling the child half stupid.



posted on Oct, 21 2014 @ 09:38 AM
link   
Why is it all about money? Because children are very very expensive. It's that simple.

I've been doing the single mom thing for ten years now; my husband and I split up when my son was four months old. I like to think that we manage the broken home situation very well. When we first divorced, he was required to pay $365 per month in support. In the last ten years, his income has went up a great deal and he has increased his payments accordingly - I have never taken him back to court to increase it. I know that per the child support's guidelines, he should probably be paying more, but what he pays now is enough, and that is all that matters. My child has everything he needs and a great deal of what he wants. He's one of the happiest children you will ever meet.

However, it didn't come easily. It's something that both parents must work at. Neither of us bad-mouth the other parent. That's our Number One Rule. By that same token, when our son started asking us why we don't live together as a family, it took some finesse to answer him adequately and still maintain that rule, but we managed.

My ex has standard visitation, which is every other weekend and every Tuesday evening. We just stick to the every other weekend for the most part, but we also work with each other if there's something one of us wants to go do with our son, or if the schedule needs to be rearranged for a trip or whatever. In the meantime, my son talks to his dad on the phone and they text and message on facebook anytime either of them wants to do so.

As to this young lady going out and drinking.... I don't think it's good for anyone to stay at home and never have any fun. All work and no play can turn Jane into a crazy woman. Taking care of a child is a full-time job and everyone deserves a break. And every child deserves a sane parent. I've always used the time when my son is with his dad to go out with friends, go on dates, etc... I'm not saying I'm out there every other weekend hitting the bars, but if I need a night out with the girls or whatever, I have 48 hours all to myself twice per month. The way I see it, if my son is in the next town with his dad for the weekend, going out for dinner and/or drinks or even going out to the bar and twisting off for a couple of hours has no effect on my son, our household or my duties as a mother. I think that my being able to go out and let off some steam on occasion probably makes me a better mom in some ways. Everyone needs to let go of all the stress and worry every now and then. I don't think humans were designed to work 24/7 with no downtime. I see his visitation as win/win for all three of us. The two of them need time together as father and son, and I need time for myself, be it for rest or recreation.

Having said that, I will also say that this young woman's family should not be raising her child for her. She made that baby, she should raise it. I'm so so tired of watching people trying to raise their grandchildren because the parents are too selfish to be decent parents. She should limit her going out on the town to the night each week that the child is with the father. I mean, really? Who needs to go out more than once a week? If she is really working at being the best mom that she can be, she should be too darn tired to go out more often than once per week! My son does spend time and occasionally the night with my parents, but it's because they want to have him over for the night and he wants to go, not because I need them to keep him so I can have a life. As a parent, it's my responsibility to make a life that includes my son, and I wouldn't have it any other way.

As for all the money and support issues, I think both parents should contribute equally to giving their child the best life that they can. If you are the parent on the receiving end of the child support, then you have the responsibility of using that money wisely on the behalf of your child. As I said in the beginning of this post, children are unbelievably expensive to raise. Sometimes sacrifices are in order. Particularly, if it comes down to going out and spending money on one's self, whether it's for booze, entertainment, clothes, whatever OR paying your daycare bill, paying your kids doctor bills, lunch bills or buying shoes for your kid because he needs them....the child MUST come first. That's your duty as a good parent.

If you aren't prepared to work and be the very best parent that it is within your power to be, you should not breed in the first place.



posted on Oct, 22 2014 @ 10:50 PM
link   
a reply to: 74Templar

If it wasn't all about money what would it be about then?

having been through a messy divorce it took me almost 6 years to find out that my mom only saw me and my siblings as income from alimony and the second she couldn't get that, she gave us to my dad.

To say that I went from being a complete momma's boy to having her call the cops on my in no time flat would be an understatement. You feel used and abused and feel like you have to compete for your two parents attention after a while.

And the #ing lies. Every other month my mom went broke from having too much credit card debt it would be all about how my dad didn't pay the money on time. All the way up until I found an envelope with a 1500 dollar check from my dad on the kitchen table that he had given her even though he had already paid her the money that the state said he did. I didn't say anything when my mom blatantly lied to my face and said that he didn't give her money that month. RIP mom, but you made my life really #ty from poor judgement calls.

Come to find out that he had only missed payment TWICE. #ing twice in almost 7 years. And that he, as a self employed carpenter, pawned his tools to pay for support. He paid out over 1800 a month for me and my siblings and even more in alimony. It got to the point where he would earn over 10 grand a month and was paying a third to my mom. When she found out that she wasn't getting child support and only alimony, she flipped the # out and a month later, we were at my dad's house. She drove me and my siblings against my dad to the point where I was making him cry because I disliked him so much. that i would flat out say I didn't want to see her for years after hurts, but that's what you get for lying to someone for years




top topics



 
7

log in

join