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.

 

Men and Child support. What is the answer?

page: 9
52
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 01:34 PM
link   
When I divorced I fought and was granted full custody of my two children. I'm a man. It made it easier that my wife at the time left me for a guy in prison and became addicted to drugs...along with many mental issues. Not making this up. She owes me 434 dollars per month in which I have never seen a dime and never tried to recover it. That was 10 years ago. The only reason I would need that much is if I had a child in daycare, after that the amount is ridiculous. Its not just about taking care of your children with child support. 50% of the recipients of child support are on foodstamps so food does not equal into that equation. Many women abuse child support and many men who should pay it do too. When divorce happens A LOT of women try to stick it to the men. Women are bitter, bitter creatures. They stick it to them with custody and that determines how much is paid. I told my lawyer i wanted nothing from her but he said " We have to put something down" it was a formula the state used at the time. You can request more but this is the minimum she had to pay. BUT support should be based on who left who and for what reasons. Support should not be paid because momma wanted some new d!@k and custody should be looked at closely in that situation. Who has the most money and who is the most bitter= winner of custody and $$$




posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


You say "I've been married once. I'm still married. My partner is a happy man."
Then all of what you preach must be second hand at best but more likely theoretical.
The topic is "Men and Child support. What is the answer", and not "here's what I think might work as I have no real world knowledge".
I think I got you figured out.



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by CaDreamer
 


I can tell you what I've learned from experience...keep your thing in your pants and you wont have to worry about it. One kid seems like its alot to pay for couldnt imagine 3



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 01:44 PM
link   
Child Support Is A For-Profit Government Fraud.In 96-98% of all child support cases, men are the victim for revenue collection.It's very discriminating against fathers.
Judges then use detainers to hold the men in jail, somewhat like bail. But, it isn't bail, because child support is a CIVIL debt. Detainers to keep the men in jail until they pay? STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES! It's not about the children! Keeping a man in jail to pay support is an oxymoron. And, most Family Court judges are morons! How does one pay child support if in jail? Does he work in the jail making $10, $15, $20/hr. and have his wages garnished? Does this person invoke the INSOLVENT DEBTORS STATUTES when he gets out of jail, since he has no assets or income, and the jailing served as the remedy for the debt owed? Under the INSOLVENT DEBTORS STATUTES, the debt has been paid once the person has been jailed for it and released. But, the state will try and keep the arrears on the books. The reason for this: Because judges are granting such high orders and enforcing them stringently because the Federal government pays the states what is known as federal reimbursement incentive funding (Title 42 USC Section 658a) for amounts awarded, collected and enforced. This money goes into the state coffers, no strings attached (42 USC Section 658f). The first things paid out of state treasuries are judicial salaries and pensions and state employee salaries and pensions (along with bonuses and bounties for child support amounts awarded and collected).
The child support industry is a total fraud. It is a $5-$10 BILLION per year INDUSTRY that, if eliminated, the monies saved and sent to the children that supposedly need it, would wipe out all child support arrears in the US at one time. All that would be needed to do is send the BILLIONS in the form of a Social Security check or wire transfer, since child support enforcement laws are part of the Social Security Act.
HENCE, NO DUE PROCESS!!!! HENCE, DEBTORS PRISON!!!! HENCE, UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!!



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 01:45 PM
link   
I'll give you my experience. I was divorced. Before the divorce, I gave the father of my children the choice to pay support or not. He chose to agree to pay support. Then, after the divorce, he became a deadbeat. It would have been better for all involved if he'd just been honest from the start.

I believe there should be incentives for fathers to pay child support. Especially for fathers like you who live up to their obligations. It isn't the children's fault the parents are divorced. The part of your income that goes to support the children should not be taxed. Alternatively, fathers who do pay child support should be able to split the child tax credit with their ex-wife. I don't know how much that would help you. I also think that fathers whose income falls into the poverty level after child support is taken out should be eligible for help. Now they're not. You're pretty much out of luck if you're a single guy in America.



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by Annee
Most child support payments are a joke.


the real joke here is the laws
concerning child support.


NO - - most child support payments are a joke. Most are not enough to cover anything significant.

Your child - - you pay for their support.


"Your child - - you pay for their support" - I take it you're referring to the custodial mom's?



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by bambam1054
 


You said, "Women are bitter, bitter creatures."
I agree, for the most part, but there are some good ones out there.
You should just avoid them all before a certain age.
Sometimes they become less bitter, but sometimes they don't.

reply to post by Evanzsayz
 

I would agree but some may not, apparently women have to have babies right away according to some.
I guess they die inside after 30, I think I might agree now.
Lucky my wife now is still very vibrant!
2nd time is the charm.



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 01:48 PM
link   
I have plenty of experience watching people screw this up from front to back.

People who think that teaching their children that "men" or "women" are horrid people because they are angry at their children's other parent - not caring about what that does to their children.

"Your Mommy is a bitter horrible person, just like all women" says the man to his daughter, telling her what he thinks of her. Says the guy trying to "protect" his son from women and instead destroying his sons early chances at having a good relationship with a good woman.

People who sabotage their relationships and their children.

These are the people you are, and the people you admire.

Your natural instinct is to choose bad decisions, and *love* those decisions more than any single other thing.

You want to do better. Then make better decisions. Start with questioning your own failing ones first.
edit on 2011/6/1 by Aeons because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
So, shopping my daughters to men to become wives to men who then harp on about how bad they got it seems like a good solution to you for raising "good" families then?


My advice to my daughters was: "You have to be One before you can be Two". In other words - know who you are - what you want - be self sufficient.

Men have told my daughters I ruined them - - because I raised them to be independent - - when I should have raised them to take care of a man. SERIOUSLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My daughter received a total of $27 from her sons father - - who chose drugs over his son. She met him at a Baptist summer camp. He was a great guy - - he just couldn't grow up. She was told she had a medical condition and would never be able to have a child. My miracle grandson is now an amazing 17 year old.

We came together as a family to help her raise him.



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by Annee
Yeah - - cuz most men don't want the full time responsibility of raising the kids.
I do admire the few that do.


most men are NOT given the choice.
and the mother fights against it
cuz it is her intention to make
a living out of child support
and not work.

now, who's the dead beat ???


It is your own gender that has screwed you over - - by their irresponsibility and doing everything they can to deny their children.

Love the clichés - - - that the best you can do?


Possibly the dumbest thing I've read on ATS.



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


hey i got one for you we could do what the ahrabs and the crazys in africa we can sew ya shut at 8 and you husband can unzip ya and sew ya up anytime hes not trying to have a baby or tie your tubes at 8 until you can support a child on your own? knotice how offensive and disrepectfull these statements are at least i state that before hand,forced vasectomys jesus thats not a soloution to anything and reeks of eugenics ,if you have a kid and split up pay your half equaly,take income into account and parental ablity and that and that alone should decide custody i think they should just give the judge a form for each parent in a divorce hearing stating income time avilible to the child but with out revealing which is which(ie a form that dosent state gender or reveal gender) so the judge dosent even have to take the gender in to the equation its not a mother or a father just a or b i dunno just an idea sorry for the rant



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by Annee
 


I fought for ALL three of my kids in court,and I have custody of them ALL.


Good for you. I know several men who have won full custody of their kids.

It still doesn't change the fact - - the number of women who receive nothing. Who are abandoned to deal with everything on their own. Which far out numbers women misusing child support.








It may or may not be true - but you certainly haven't established it as a "fact."

Sounds more like a biased uneducated opinion to me!
edit on 1-6-2011 by CayceFan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Binder
reply to post by Annee
 


I gross $70K a year. After medical insurance, taxes, and child support I net $400 a week. She makes $50K a year before my child support bolsters her net an additional $27K a year


So what.

It is your child.


I must have misread his post? Did he claim it wasn't his child? Duh!

His point seemed very clear to me - you dont seem to have one!



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by KilrathiLG
 


Yep, that's exactly where the stuff is going. But the guys on here only notice how offensive and horrid it is if they think that THEY might have to live it themselves.



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by KilrathiLG
reply to post by Aeons
 

if you have a kid and split up pay your half equaly,take income into account and parental ablity and that and that alone should decide custody i think they should just give the judge a form for each parent in a divorce hearing stating income time avilible to the child but with out revealing which is which(ie a form that dosent state gender or reveal gender) so the judge dosent even have to take the gender in to the equation its not a mother or a father just a or b i dunno just an idea sorry for the rant


Its sad because I was making more then her because she took off for almost a year, I was paying more bills and in the end the lady judge tells me I am not the head of the household just the bread winner
so in the end she got more custody of my 7 yr old and I got weekends lol @ im just the bread winner not head of household. The lady judge said she was head of household because she stayed home more
And that was it she said what she wanted I argued it down a couple hundred and the rest is history.
edit on 6/1/11 by Ophiuchus 13 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 02:09 PM
link   
Family courts routinely deprive men of their fundamental right to parent their own children by charging them with a wide variety of trivial offenses. Family courts generally uphold feminist demands to kick a man out of his own home, and take control of their children and his money, based on a woman’s unsubstantiated allegations. A major weapon in this ongoing battle between men and women who don’t get along is the Violence Against Women Act. This law was passed in 1994 as a payoff to the radical feminists for helping to elect Bill Clinton President in 1992.

The Violence Against Women Act shows the hypocrisy of noisy feminist demands that we kowtow to their ideology of gender neutrality, to their claim that there is no difference between male and female, and to their opposition to stereotyping and gender profiling. There is nothing sex neutral about this law. It is based on the proposition that there are, indeed, innate gender differences: men are naturally batterers and women are naturally victims. This law is not designed to eliminate or punish violence, but to punish only alleged violence against women. Most of the shelters financed by the Violence Against Women Act do not accept men as victims.

This law has been known from the getgo as “feminist pork” because it puts $1 Billion a year of U.S. taxpayers’ money into the hands of the radical feminists. They have set up shop in domestic violence shelters where they promote divorce, marriage breakup, hatred of men, and false accusations, while rejecting marriage counseling, reconciliation, drug-abuse treatment, and evidence of mutual-partner abuse. There is no accountability for the taxpayers’ money spent in these shelters. This law provides the woman with free legal counsel to pursue her allegations, but not the man to defend himself. He is on his own to find and pay a lawyer.



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 02:13 PM
link   
I agree. There needs to be some balance on the issue. Men should have to pay for their kids, but there is a limit, particularly if all the kids are with one mother. Now, there are some guys that go out there and have three or four kids with three or four women, and I feel like they should have to pay out the nose for being morons.

But if all the kids are with one mother, there's no need for a guy to be paying half his income to the mom. And, in most cases, alimony is garbage. Exceptions include if he's the one to initiate the divorce or if abuse or affair can be documented. With documened being the key word; not some crappy baseless allegations.

As for custody, men really do get the short end of the stick a lot of the time. I'll say this, though: when it comes to the actual, physical child rearing and not just paying the bills, a lot of the time it's mom that does the bulk of the work.

Still, I think custody should be based on whoever shows up at daycare, takes the kid to the doctor, goes to PTA meetings, goes to parent/teacher conferences. AKA whoever does the bulk of the child rearing. I'll also say that I think the default with teenage boys should always be dad unless there are compelling circumstances.


edit on 1-6-2011 by FatedAxion because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 02:34 PM
link   
I know one thing, putting parents in jail when they cant pay child support doesn't fix the issue. That just costs the state more money and hurts the father and the children in the long run.

Second, there are mothers out there who consider child support a permanent source of income, that also has to change. Not saying here that it is wrong to expect a father to support his children, just that a mother is a parent too and shares equal responsibility in support of the children. Because of those two things, I think there are several things we as a society can do to help single parents out outside of welfare.

Rehabilition- Not in the sense of drug or alcohol programs but in the form of tax credits, or lowered tuition programs in schools for single parents. This will help insure that single parents both mothers and fathers are able to get the education they need and finally get a sustainable job.

Family counceling- This is to help the parents deal with emotional stress after the fact but may also pre-emptively aid in the goal of keeping a family together, rather than allow it to spiral so far down that the family is broken. Believe it or not, stress is a major factor both before the fact and after the fact of failed marriages.

Paid and un-penalized days off for when children need hospital visits.
Tax credits for day-care

Insurance- insurance if considered mandatory by the courts for children, has to be fair. Paying high insurance rates is not helping a family, at all not in any way. Money is being spent on "what if" and "in the event of" type insurances which in reality, well to be honest we just dont need a type of insurance that runs all year round, we need on the spot sorts of deals so the cost of medicine should be evaluated too, a 4 hour wait and sit in the emergency room should not cost 1100 dollars.

The economy- One of the major booms in our country came before everything was fully automated, manufacturers and other companies should re-evauluate whether they should pay for that big new set of machines or simply hire a good set of skilled laborers. While we should always welcome technology, we should never replace the human workforce where it safely performs and benefits the economy.

I believe those are a few things that might be taken into consideration, I do believe in the preservation of the family unit, and I dont think that penalizing parents because of a failed relationship is just cause to have any side suffer any more than they already have.

One last thing here, because I come from a "broken family" changes have to be made from within on both sides of the picture. We as a society have to change our ways of thinking. Too much of our life is based on who has the nicest car, nicest home, the best clothes. On the personal side, too many things go on like cheating on spouses, drug and alcohol abuse and believing we are better off without that other person due to constant disagreement. People cannot be replaced, that is one of the biggest lies anyone will ever hear. "Plenty of fish in the sea" and "The grass is greener on the other side" is utter BS. Love each other and have patience, reconcile where possible and accept that people aren't always right, just stubborn.

Op good luck to you and hang in there.
edit on 1-6-2011 by Nephalim because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by CranialSponge
Here in Canada, the payer of child support claims it as a deduction to their taxable income and the receiver pays tax on the income received.

So it balances out accordingly.

Maybe the US will catch up with the 21st century some day.

edit on 31-5-2011 by CranialSponge because: (no reason given)


Your forgetting of course the millions of dead beat dad's that
A. Work under the table and doesn't pay taxes.
B. Doesn't work at all...

Your solution seems easy enough when your dealing with only what 35 millions in canada?

America has 300 million.

It would not balance as your system has.



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Aeons
So, shopping my daughters to men to become wives to men who then harp on about how bad they got it seems like a good solution to you for raising "good" families then?


My advice to my daughters was: "You have to be One before you can be Two". In other words - know who you are - what you want - be self sufficient.

Men have told my daughters I ruined them - - because I raised them to be independent - - when I should have raised them to take care of a man. SERIOUSLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My daughter received a total of $27 from her sons father - - who chose drugs over his son. She met him at a Baptist summer camp. He was a great guy - - he just couldn't grow up. She was told she had a medical condition and would never be able to have a child. My miracle grandson is now an amazing 17 year old.

We came together as a family to help her raise him.


So they learnt Momma wasn't stupid
after all huh?

That is a great story, I'm glad you guys pulled together family, helping family, not the government..



new topics

top topics



 
52
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join