Men and Child support. What is the answer?

reply to post by CoherentlyConfused


i had custody of the children for several years yes i do know the costs... i pay about 2X the cost to raise 2 Teens every month, the court does not care really, its about predetermined formulas made to fit all cases...there is no such formula in the real world.

I was paying the equivalent of food, clothing, 1/2 rent all expenses that i was paying while i had an entire family at home.
now i have to support 2 households. including the ex-wives new husband. who thinks i could do more.

reply to post by sonnny1


the only ones allowed to throw claims around in a family courtroom are those tied directly to the legal system.

As in the govt automatically ASSUMING that the mother is 90% + the right choice for the children without any review at all.

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by CoherentlyConfused

 

Unfortunately,just a hunch of drug use,doesn't get the Judge involved. You have to have PROOF. Trust me,as a father who told a judge about the drug use,but was told I needed proof,and anything else was defamation of character. Judge honestly told me that.

And the judge was right. Wouldn't want it to work the other way either, though sadly it often does.

reply to post by sonnny1


Pee and hair tests don't lie. If you honestly suspect drug abuse and plea to the court, the judge should (and i say should because not all judges should be in their position) order a test. I will totally agree to the fact that the judicial system is quite skewed in favor of the woman.

It all comes down to this, really--if you don't want to pay support, fight for custody. Don't just file---fight. In the end, if the courts give custody to the mother, then the father needs to pay support. Period. If you simply don't want custody or you don't feel you should "have" to pay support, too bad, so sad. Life sucks but it's not the child's fault that you were 50% responsible for bringing them into this crappy, unfair world.

Originally posted by CoherentlyConfused
reply to post by sonnny1

 

Pee and hair tests don't lie. If you honestly suspect drug abuse and plea to the court, the judge should (and i say should because not all judges should be in their position) order a test. I will totally agree to the fact that the judicial system is quite skewed in favor of the woman.

It all comes down to this, really--if you don't want to pay support, fight for custody. Don't just file---fight. In the end, if the courts give custody to the mother, then the father needs to pay support. Period. If you simply don't want custody or you don't feel you should "have" to pay support, too bad, so sad. Life sucks but it's not the child's fault that you were 50% responsible for bringing them into this crappy, unfair world.

whoa Nellie. Not so fast. Yes, he should have to pay support after losing a custody battle, but nowhere near what the courts demand. Which is why I brought up about being able to live on $50 a week as a big boi.

States have guidelines. If you need a reduction due to your income, file for one.

Originally posted by CoherentlyConfused
States have guidelines. If you need a reduction due to your income, file for one.

It should not be based on your income, that's my point. It should be based on regional/county cost of living standards. The same standards set forth by welfare (albeit not very practically.)

Originally posted by CobraCommander

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by CoherentlyConfused

 

Unfortunately,just a hunch of drug use,doesn't get the Judge involved. You have to have PROOF. Trust me,as a father who told a judge about the drug use,but was told I needed proof,and anything else was defamation of character. Judge honestly told me that.

And the judge was right. Wouldn't want it to work the other way either, though sadly it often does.

Yep. I found proof. I also believe he was right.

reply to post by CoherentlyConfused


i think that whenever there is an allegation of drug use a test should be ordered immediately for both parents. to be fair and unbiased.

Originally posted by CaDreamer
reply to post by CoherentlyConfused

 

i had custody of the children for several years yes i do know the costs... i pay about 2X the cost to raise 2 Teens every month, the court does not care really, its about predetermined formulas made to fit all cases...there is no such formula in the real world.

I was paying the equivalent of food, clothing, 1/2 rent all expenses that i was paying while i had an entire family at home.
now i have to support 2 households. including the ex-wives new husband. who thinks i could do more.

edit on 11-6-2011 by CaDreamer because: to add

Outside of the support I pay, I just bought my oldest son a pair of shoes. It cost me $30. For shoes. He's on the school's basketball team. He's also 16 and just got his permit and his uncle gave him a car. He wants to fix this car up and put it on the road, which will cost him a few hundred dollars. I paid for the tires and his dad paid for the new brake system and exhaust. How much do you think that costs? He wants to put it on the road when he gets his license in September. I pay $150 per week for 2 boys and that's above the current guidelines. Think that will get him on the road? Maybe for a month. What about his brother?

The state guidelines are minimal and anyone complaining about how much they pay really have no clue.

reply to post by CoherentlyConfused


your support is based on a formula and the only thing counted as disposable income at least in my case in Ca. is taxes, and prior court orders. they do not adjust for the noncustodial parents rent, nor food, nor clothing, nor vehicle expenses. not a very good set to determine real actual costs and ability to pay.
support isn't the issue its the application, and the non real world figures the system spits out without thought of survival.

Originally posted by CoherentlyConfused
States have guidelines. If you need a reduction due to your income, file for one.

Like I said,some States have a 3 year waiting period to file. Three years is a lifetime.Unless you get hauled in,AFTER you lose your job,and after your considered a felon,by letting arrears build up.Most of the time,at least in the cases I have personally seen,the Judge ordered full payment and kept arrears as-is,or told the non custodial he didnt care if he didnt have a job. "You have a responsibility to pay for your child". PERIOD. No compassion. No rule or law for the new "deadbeat".

reply to post by CoherentlyConfused


I am starting to like you...

you are after all, one of us. gender isnt really the issue either, as i stated many times in this thread and in my OP

Stop thinking about what you think you should pay and start thinking about what your kids need. There's a big difference.

Originally posted by CaDreamer
reply to post by CoherentlyConfused

 

i think that whenever there is an allegation of drug use a test should be ordered immediately for both parents. to be fair and unbiased.

Actually, I have to disagree with that too, unless it coincides with an allegation of abuse.

reply to post by CoherentlyConfused


um, that's what we all have been saying for nearly 70 pages. income isn't relevant, actual expenses are the matter. Actual expenses are not part of the formula here.

I wish I wish i lived in Australia. Sigh.


oh well four more months four more months four more months...

Originally posted by CoherentlyConfused



The state guidelines are minimal and anyone complaining about how much they pay really have no clue.

Not true at all. You are NOT paying for court fees,Paper work fees for USING the CSA,or having your "support" collect interest in the CSA mega fund(Your Children's money). You also never had to deal with Lawyers,guardian ad litems,psychologists,or any other agency a court might want you to have contact with.All that needs to get paid. If you have a Job,your paying. Period. Then you can talk about the extras,like braces,and shoes,food,etc. Nowhere in the child support guidelines does it say its fair,or balanced.

reply to post by CaDreamer


Is that your way of saying that in four more months, you don't need to support your kids anymore? Because you're in for a surprise.

My oldest is 21 and I am still paying out. She's in college now, living with her boyfriend and works full time. I still give her money when she needs it.

You are a parent until you die.

reply to post by CobraCommander


my ex accused me of drug use, i did not offer allegation about her, she is a heavy user, i do not / did not use. I asked the court to test us both, the court declined to test either of us.

Those that are guilty often protest the loudest. If a parent makes such an allegation, it should be necessary that the court establish that A. the claim is true/false. ( a childs life is in the balance here)
B. that other parent wasn't a user as well, often its both parents or neither. and often yes its only one parent.

isn't addictive or habitual drug/ alcohol use abuse? if so it applies to your terms for accepting the test for both parents.
I understand your hesitation though, innocent til proven guilty. and agree with that as well.
I wish i knew a proper way to solve this problem.

reply to post by CoherentlyConfused


no in four months my son turns 18 and enters the military. all support stops on his birthday. anything my son wants he knows i will Always provide, without hesitation. All he need do is ask, his older sister can attest to that fact.