|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 592
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 592 |
I have a rant about child support. I am not going to post yet as I want a more rational thought.
What are your stances on child support with WS's? I think if a WS leaves the family then yes they should pay for CS.
Some figures I see that a BS must pay to the WS is crazy. I compare what I spend on my DS a month and doesn't even come close to what some judges award.
I know there is a formula the courts use and so on, but does that still make it right?
We reward bad behavior with money while the BS is just capable of caring for the child/ren themselves.
I still don't understand why in this day and age that children are still assumed to go with the mother. If the mother is the better, sane parent then fine but if not why does the father still get denied the same privilege?
How many time do we hear that when a child does something wrong the excuse is that the father isn't around, they needed a father figure.
Anyways.................Thoughts? I would like to hear other opinions.
Last edited by New_Path; 11/27/11 05:39 PM.
Aka S2
I know what's next. I filed for D. Original betrayal and two FR's in one year. I'm done.
A sure way to lose happiness, I found, is to want it at the expense of everything else.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,549 Likes: 10
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,549 Likes: 10 |
I have a rant about child support. I am not going to post yet as I want a more rational thought.
What are your stances on child support with WS's? I think if a WS leaves the family then yes they should pay for CS.
Some figures I see that a BS must pay to the WS is crazy. I compare what I spend on my DS a month and doesn't even come close to what some judges award.
I know there is a formula the courts use and so on, but does that still make it right?
We reward bad behavior with money while the BS is just capable of caring for the child/ren themselves.
I still don't understand why in this day and age that children are still assumed to go with the mother. If the mother is the better, sane parent then fine but if not why does the father still get denied the same privilege?
How many time do we hear that when a child does something wrong the excuse is that the father isn't around, they needed a father figure.
Anyways.................Thoughts? I would like to hear other opinions. Child support is not the same thing a custody. it seems to me that your rant should really be about the awarding of custody (50/50 or any other proportion) to a WS. You surely want to support your own children. It doesn't seem to me that supporting them is the issue.
BW Married 1989 His PA 2003-2006 2 kids.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 592
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 592 |
Ok I agree my rant is more about custody.
I still think some of these figures that are formulated are just crazy.
So yes it starts with custody for a WS and then they receive this exorbitant amount of CS.
Aka S2
I know what's next. I filed for D. Original betrayal and two FR's in one year. I'm done.
A sure way to lose happiness, I found, is to want it at the expense of everything else.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1
Member
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1 |
I still don't understand why in this day and age that children are still assumed to go with the mother. If the mother is the better, sane parent then fine but if not why does the father still get denied the same privilege? MEN "assume" the children go with the mother. And then they contact a lazy attorney who says "women always get the kids" or "it is always 50/50." [regardless of the fitness of the mother] Since men don't fight, wayward wives usually win. Men are saying "we should surrender!!" and then wonder why they lose. I don't get it.
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.." Theodore Roosevelt Exposure 101
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 592
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 592 |
ML, I am fighting and most likely win. It seems in our society that is what has been conditioned for men. I don't get it either. I wasn't going down without a fight.
That brings up the question in no fault states, does adultery have any bearing on custody? I have heard mostly no that in the best interest of the child they need both parents.
I still question the formula for CS.
Aka S2
I know what's next. I filed for D. Original betrayal and two FR's in one year. I'm done.
A sure way to lose happiness, I found, is to want it at the expense of everything else.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,686
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,686 |
Ask some guy you know who lost everything in a divorce and ask who his XWs attorney was, then hire them.
One year becomes two, two years becomes five, five becomes ten and before you know it, you've wasted your whole life on a problem you can't solve. That's one way to spend your life. -rwinger
I will not spend my life this way.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1
Member
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985 Likes: 1 |
ML, I am fighting and most likely win. It seems in our society that is what has been conditioned for men. I don't get it either. I wasn't going down without a fight. Good for you! That brings up the question in no fault states, does adultery have any bearing on custody? I have heard mostly no that in the best interest of the child they need both parents. In many no fault states it DOES have a bearing!! But here again, men are conditioned to say "we live in a no fault state so it doesn't matter." And AGAIN, in many no-fault states it does matter very much. In Texas, for example, even though it is a no fault state, adultery is taken into account when it comes to custody and child support.
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.." Theodore Roosevelt Exposure 101
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,686
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,686 |
Especially if the OM/OW has some sort of record.
One year becomes two, two years becomes five, five becomes ten and before you know it, you've wasted your whole life on a problem you can't solve. That's one way to spend your life. -rwinger
I will not spend my life this way.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 71
Member
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 71 |
i went after custody of my oldest son 2 times after physical abuse first time and child endangering second time and was told by the judge and i quote
"A childs place is with thier mother"
that was said to me in court by the family court judge where we live.
now i am not saying that it is like that everywhere but this is a good example that it does exist.
as far as CS goes i have no problem paying for my oldest son do i think i pay too much yes but there isnt anything i can do about that the courts have thier system on how to figure it and thats that.
i still spend as much time as possible with my oldest son.
Last edited by Rouge1; 11/28/11 10:39 AM.
male 43 years old married 9 years (might not make it to 10 years) 3 kids 1 from previous marraige 2 from current marriage
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,736
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,736 |
Courts are loathe to change things. So when a working dad faces an unfaithful stay at home mom, he's not getting custody unless she's entertaining clients pole dancing in the child's bedroom and doing lines of coke with the child. So it's not as simple as you paint it. I would have been glad to have my child. But since I wasn't the stay at home parent, it wasn't going to happen, regardless if I fought in court or not. In fact, in IL, where I live, the state supreme court ruled that marital infidelity CANNOT be considered in custody decisions. But how do I change the law, and why wasn't that already done by those who went ahead of me so betrayed fathers had half a chance to actually get custody of their children? By the time it would get changed now, my child would be long an adult. I still don't understand why in this day and age that children are still assumed to go with the mother. If the mother is the better, sane parent then fine but if not why does the father still get denied the same privilege? MEN "assume" the children go with the mother. And then they contact a lazy attorney who says "women always get the kids" or "it is always 50/50." [regardless of the fitness of the mother] Since men don't fight, wayward wives usually win. Men are saying "we should surrender!!" and then wonder why they lose. I don't get it.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 650
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 650 |
But how do I change the law, and why wasn't that already done by those who went ahead of me so betrayed fathers had half a chance to actually get custody of their children? You know how the law will get changed? When there are a lot of women who complain loudly enough that their sons are getting screwed. They won't do it if guys complain, after all the only reason guys want custody is to avoid paying any money, right? Look at how hard men's organizations are having to fight to just change laws regarding paternity fraud and lifetime alimony. It's a laugh when they say that both the man and woman's contributions are calculated, and the amounts of child support often border on the exorbitant. I love when I read articles about how the man's standard of living goes up in a divorce while a woman's goes down, both spouses come out of it the worse for wear, but it kind of rankles when you have upwards of 40% of your pre-tax income taken out when you spent nowhere near that when you lived together, and of course, you don't see unemployed women being put in jail when they can't afford to pay their share. If the custodial spouse can't afford to provide an adequqate safe home and food, perhaps the higher earning spouse should be the custodial parent, that is if we are really talking about the best interests of the child(ren). but I'm not cynical, no, not at all.
The one constant through all the years has been baseball. America has rolled by like an army of steamrollers. It's been erased like a blackboard, rebuilt, and erased again. But baseball has marked the time. This field, this game, is a part of our past. It reminds us of all that once was good, and it could be again.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 650
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 650 |
"A childs place is with thier mother"
that was said to me in court by the family court judge where we live. You know the worst part of it, it's guys that are doing this, guys of my father's generation whose heads are still stuck on the way it used to be in the 40's and 50's. We do it to ourselves. What was once a movement for equal rights has seen the pendulum swing far to the opposite pole. of cousre if you complain about it, you're just being a baby or a wimp, or a nut if you are part of a men's organization or mens rights group. NOW = concerned women just trying to set things right. MRA = maladjusted loser/crybaby who doesn't want to pay child support Men should look at what NOW has been able to accomplish and do the same thing.
The one constant through all the years has been baseball. America has rolled by like an army of steamrollers. It's been erased like a blackboard, rebuilt, and erased again. But baseball has marked the time. This field, this game, is a part of our past. It reminds us of all that once was good, and it could be again.
|
|
|
Moderated by Ariel, BerlinMB, Denali, Fordude, IrishGreen, MBeliever, MBSync, McLovin, Mizar, PhoenixMB, Toujours
0 members (),
312
guests, and
62
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums67
Topics133,623
Posts2,323,493
Members71,967
|
Most Online3,185 Jan 27th, 2020
|
|
|
|