Skittles2222 - Marriage Builders® Forums

If I understand correctly you posted that you are a professional career women. If so, would you be willing to take part in a little healthy debate ?
Everytime I have posted these quotes to an OW they have become hostile, began name calling and COMPLETELY ignored the points at hand. I would appreciate a little intelligent input.1.
"Where fundamental rights such as procreation are involved, limiting these rights may be justified only by a compelling state interest. The potential child's right to child support and to share in the man's standard of living is not absolute, as is demonstrated by single parent adoptions, which the various social service agencies look upon favorably. Biology is not destiny. In a sense, the right to relinquish parental responsibilities is easier to argue for than abortion rights, because it's not pitted against a potential child's right to life (Morse Jr, Position Paper).2.
"If a man's rights end at the point of ejaculation, so do his responsibilities. Where an individual has no rights, he has no responsibilities. Current law forces a man to bear the consequences of a choice in which he plays no part. Since a man is allowed no voice in the decision whether to abort, he cannot be held responsible for the outcome, be it termination or childbirth. If the woman alone possesses the right to determine whether a pregnancy will be terminated, then she alone possesses the power to determine whether a child will be born (Loberfeld 47). [Italics his"3.
"It should now be clear that the common reasons for denying men similar reproductive options as women can only be based on gender, and are in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Therefore the current double standard that exists for men and women cannot be upheld any longer. The unjust situation that men are stuck with in the event of an accidental pregnancy is this: they have no right to determine whether they become a parent or not, but they are locked into the responsibility to financially support the child if it is born. "Jtigger

Okay, here’s my 2 cents. I hope it’s taken in the context in which is intended – for DEBATE.My perspective is this: Every man and woman knows, by the time they reach middle school, how pregnancy occurs. It is a known fact that the only fool-proof, non-invasive form of birth control is abstinence. Rejecting that as a choice, the consenting parties’ other option is sterilization. Of those available choices, the only one that has 100% success for birth control is a hysterectomy. So, this leads me to presume that a man and/or woman that has protected or unprotected sex is aware of the risks. They have been educated in school, at home, through media, through friends, etc. The most common, unwelcome consequences are STD’s and pregnancy. To say you didn’t want to get a disease/pregnant is secondary to the fact that you willingly and with FULL disclosure of possible outcomes had sex. When I say full disclosure, I mean that to encompass not only the predictable medical conditions, but also the knowledge legal issues, i.e. a woman’s right to choose. Whether it is fair or unfair is not really relevant at the time the two parties consent to intercourse. What is relevant is that both parties are aware of the legal issues and choose to ignore them for the gain of instant gratification. This disregard for consequence is their downfall. They made a bad choice and now she’s pregnant. Reality slaps them both in the face and fear/anger sets in. She faces making a life-altering decision and NOW he’s upset/bothered/angry at his lack of rights. Yet, it wasn’t much of an issue for him at the time he was committing the act that led to the pregnancy. It amazes me how indiscriminate people can be when choosing sexual partners…..me included. The saying that a man thinks with his penis is very telling and true. They do not think beyond the here and now.So, she’s pregnant. What are her choices? Remember, it’s been established that the man knew the choices were hers to make, as provided by law, at the time of intercourse and willingly proceeded with intercourse. She can choose to abort, or carry and keep baby, or carry and adopt baby out. For me, abortion would be an option only in dire circumstance. I do not believe in it as a form of birth control. The next option, carry and keep baby, is the hot one. It is hard for me to accept that a man’s responsibilities to his child should end at the point of ejaculation. If the man knew what his rights, or lack of, would be BEFORE having sex and yet opted to continue, why should he be absolved of any consequence and responsibility for his action? An extreme analogy would be letting a murderer go free because he didn’t know that shooting someone might kill them. Whether he meant for the person to die or not, the fact remains that he pulled the trigger. As a result he must face the consequences of his thoughtless action. The man unwittingly waived his right to choose to parent or not parent at the time he chose to commit an act intended for procreation. He wasn’t just practicing and shooting blanks. It was the real deal. Real sex. Real sperm. If he didn’t want a child with the woman, he should not have had sex with her. You can bet your last dollar that I will be MUCH more selective when choosing my next partner. I’m not trying to say that by having sex he WANTED to have a child, but he knew it was a possibility and set it aside for his own selfish moment.This leads me to the choice of adoption. Being a single parent who can provide well for her child with or without the father’s help, I do not believe that a gainfully employed person who can provide and care for their child should have to give that child up because the man does not wish to parent. The child came to be as a result of the actions initiated by two people…the man and the woman. I know of the phrase “sperm-donor” and can understand why it’s used in this forum. However, I sometimes have an issue with it on a personal level because at the time of conception, at least for me, it was not in a clinical, cold setting. But that’s irrelevant. Getting back on track, it is my opinion that a man, having had consensual sex, is on the hook until A) there is NO pregnancy or B) BOTH parents agree to adoption and parental rights are terminated as a result. But, if even one of the parents chooses to keep the child, it is and should be their right to do so. Which means that BOTH parents are STILL responsible for the maintenance of that child. They are both still on the hook they got on when they had sex. Why? Because, going back to the point at which the man and woman chose to have sex, that was the point of no-return. It was at THAT moment that other choices had been unwittingly made, even though they had not yet been voiced. It was at THAT moment that responsibility was assigned. This is not a la carte living. Certain choices come with certain conditions that cannot be separated out. Parental responsibility is one very common result of having sex. For a man who has sex and ends up being the father of a child he does not want, adoption would be a welcome relief to his legal obligation, but should not be expected solely for the purpose of relieving his burden. In my situation, when I first came to this board about 1 ½ years ago, many here advocated adopting my baby out. It was a very painful time for me. At one point I honestly started thinking that maybe I didn’t love my baby enough or I would give him up. I was made to doubt myself and my ability to be a good parent. I felt inadequate. The truth is I’m a good mother. My son is much loved, well provided for, and is very healthy all the way around. His father did not want to be in this situation, but once the decision was made, he and his W agreed that he had a moral and legal obligation. He was not forced or raped into parenthood and neither was I. We were consenting adults who made some really dumb choices. I could sit here and point the finger at him and say “YOU got me pregnant! This is YOUR fault”. He could say “I DON’T want to be a father to this kid. Why did YOU get pregnant?!” The hard truth is WE got ourselves into a situation we did not want to be in and we had to face it head on. The ripple effect of what we did was phenomenal. The circumstances under which my son was conceived did not preclude me from being his parent. If a child is to be given up for adoption it should be for the benefit of the child and not the benefit of the adults. That statement can lead to the debate of single vs. two-parent households, but I’ll leave that to another day. My fingers are tired and I’m ready to go home.Take care,OB1Oh, one more thing, "It should now be clear that the common reasons for denying men similar reproductive options as women can only be based on gender, and are in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Therefore the current double standard that exists for men and women cannot be upheld any longer. The unjust situation that men are stuck with in the event of an accidental pregnancy is this: they have no right to determine whether they become a parent or not, but they are locked into the responsibility to financially support the child if it is born. "I believe that if the woman wants to terminate, but the man wants to have the child, the woman should carry to term, give custody to the father, and pay CS. It's the same concept of taking ownership for your actions. Okay, now I'm really going home. [img]images/icons/smile.gif" border="0[/img]

P.S.If I get flamed, it's okay. I can take it.It's a touchy topic and probably should not be put out there for debate...at least not here. But it is and I wanted to bite. If I see this thread might go in the wrong direction, then I'll simply delete my response and wait for things to die down.Okay, so NOW I'm REALLY heading home. I've got a hot date with a Lil Man about 2 foot something and 30 plus pounds...he's real big on cuddling and loves to sit down to a good bottle and quiet time with his momma.....night!

ohbratti,
Thanks for your reply. I appreciate your opinion . And I hear what you are saying. But you still have not addressed the issue of unequal reproductive rights for men and women.
The fact is , regardless of your decision, you DID have a choice. MM did not. This is the foundation of my argument. By law sex is not consent to parenthood for women, but it is for men. Whether a women chooses to abort, have the baby and put it up for adoption or have the baby and keep it at least she has a choice. The only choice men have is abstinence. I want to discuss the logic behind the inequity. I want to discuss more than " thats the way it is and men have to live with it".
Jtigger

To everyone that wished to know what I do(professionally), I'm Social Worker in Minnesota. Someone asked why I seem to become hostile regarding certain topics, I don't feel that I do become hostile. Perhaps I say things that some of you ladies wish not to hear, could that be the case?Yes, I have strong feelings regarding several issues having to do with fathers/mothers that don't take responsibilty for their children, parents that don't pay child support, and child abuse/neglect. The reasons for these feelings stem for both work and home. A quick overview of "home" consists of - 1 young daughter and myself. Her father decided he wasn't "ready" to be a father(yes, I WAS married to him, but NOT anymore), I wouldn't get an abortion due to my own religious convictions, he stayed around for a while, but decided to leave when I was 5 months pregnant. I have done it all on my own, while he lives a lavish lifestyle making $70,000 a year. He has fought me tooth and nail regarding the amount of child he pays, knowing he can afford to pay within the guidelines for the state we live in. His daughter doesn't know him as "daddy" because he never takes the time to be one. But, he potrays himself in court like accually cares and tries to see her, but BIG BAD MOM won't let him. Right. Great guy, huh?My sister went through something similar. She was involved in a relationship with a man, presumed to be single, for about 6 months. He conducted himself as though he were a bachelor, mixing with our family and friends, was always available when she called him, his friends new about her, etc. Everything seemed normal as far as their relationship was concerned, she was happy with him. AFTER she found out she was pregnant, was when the truth had to come out. She, also, wouldn't have an abortion due to her regard for life. When she passed 16 weeks(last week allowed to get a LEGAL abortion in MN), he told her he was still married to someone else. For a while he tried to "have his cake and eat it too" but my sister shut him down. This estranged wife of his, has made threats against her(she still insists that my sister knew he was married)and the child, and says that he doesn't have any responsibilties toward the child at all. Another great guy, huh?As for work, that is pretty self-explanitory. I deal with dead-beat parents all day long. I deal with poor children that wouldn't have half as hard a life if the other parent would contribute. It makes me sick to see parents that take no responsibility for their actions. The children deserve better. The custodial parent ends up working themselves to death so they can support the child(ren)that they love. When court rolls around and the other parent has the opportunity to speak on why they don't do their part(physically, emotionally, and financially)they ALWAYS give a "poor me" story to the judge.Now do any of you ladies wish to question why I come across the way I do sometimes? I don't believe I have EVER been disrespectful to any of you, just to the point.

Skittles,
You haven't responded to my original quotes. All you have done is revert back to the "bad old man doesn't want to face his responsiblity " line.
I want to hear justification for the current inequity in the laws.
Why is the reproductive freedom afforded one sex not available to the other and how is this equality ?Jtigger

It seems like all you want to do is try to start an arguement with me or bash my POV. Ask God why he didn't make men and women reproductively equal. And again, I didn't make the laws, I just deal with those who try to avoid them.Basically, to all of the people that create children and then complain about having to take equal responsibility for them(mother or father), Child Support is the screwin' ya get for the screwin' ya got. Or at least thats what we say around the office.Let's not try to make this a political issue, it's not worth anyone's time. If you make a child take EQUAL responsibilty for it. Thats the only equality issue I'm going to address because its the only issue WORTH addressing.

Jtigger,
i am not skittles but i somewhat agree with something she said-- how can there be laws on equality in the responsibilty or choosing to be a parent when we were not created equally in the ability to have children. Men don't have to go through the hormonal or physical changes involved in having a child. They don't have to carry a child for nine months and then go through horrific labor pains to bring that child into this world. Is that fair? if you were pregnant by your husband and before the baby was born he told you that he didn't want a (or another) child, would you abort or adopt out your child simply because your husband doesn't want it? If a man could have a child, do you think the laws would be different?

Skittles,
It is really very sad that your husband abandoned you and your daughter. And I can see why, working with this sort of thing on a regular basis, you would get your own biases from your own experiences. However, there are still problems with things you have said on this board. You did not respond to my comments to you on "Some senarios for EVERYONE to think about... (Page 1)". Not all custodial parents are angels; it IS possible for non-custodial parents to get screwed by the other parent and/or system. It's easy to flap your gums without engaging in some real thought or honest debate, looking at other perspectives and possibilities. Have you read ANY of the principles put forth by the Harley website here?? Do you know anything about affair-proofing a marriage?? You obviously do NOT know what professional counselors have had to say about a marriage coping with a child by an affair, and you've not experienced one yourself. I don't agree with 100% of what is said on this board, but it exists to help people experiencing a particular thing, in a LOT of pain, something they can't talk about with many other people as it is so taboo.If you're just here to lecture, there's no point in staying. You aren't helping.

Skittles & SBG,**They don't have to carry a child for nine months and then go through horrific labor pains to bring that child into this world***That is the whole point. Women don't have to go through it either. Thay have a CHOICE.
As far as your argument that thats just the way it is and you have to accept it... Its a good thing everyone didn't feel that way when slavery was the norm, women couldn't vote and segregation was a way of life. Just because something is the law doesn't make it right or mean that it doesn't need changing.
And as far as I can remember, my children and I didn't do any screwin so why are we getting screwed by the system ? Or is it social worker mentality that only illegitimate children are important ?
You are wrong , I truly am not trying to pick a fight. I have been asking these same questions for almost 4 years now and I always get the same answer. MM is a sack of sh*t and I'm a bit*h because he resents not having any choice in the birth ( notice I didn't say conception ) of a child he didn't want.
And as far as what would I do if I had a unwanted pregnancy. I really don't know. You see I made sure that didn't happen to me. There is a new invention called birth control, I made sure I used it. And before you start telling me how MM should have used a condom, women have the greater responsibility for BC since we have the greater choices. You can't whine and cry about the freedom to make a choice over what happens to your body and then turn and cry about how the bad man got you pregnant. And while we are on the subject, why do every one of these OW cry about BC failing ? Of all the women I know, not one has ever had BC fail. Why does it seem to happen to these OW on such a regular basis ? Coincidence ? I don't think so.Jtigger***An extreme analogy would be letting a murderer go free because he didn’t know that shooting someone might kill them***Now add to that that the murderer shot and killed that person and instead of sending him to jail we paid him a monthly salary for his crime.[ January 24, 2002: Message edited by: Jtigger ]

JTigger,My stance on reproductive rights is pretty simple. If you do the crime, you do the time. That applies to either gender. If the woman, oops, got pregnant, well, sorry Charlie. If she was ready to have sex, then she better be ready to accept whatever consequences come with it. As I stated, I don’t believe in abortion as a form of birth control. The possible “choices”, in my opinion, are either BOTH agree to terminate or BOTH agree to adopt. If there’s any disagreement, then I would advocate for the right to life for the child and both parents share the responsibility of providing for that child. I’ve been witness to the scenario where the man wants the child and the woman does not. Therefore, his right to be a parent is denied by the woman who chose to abort. It’s very unfair. It was my own brother who went through this not once, but twice…with the same woman. My brother deals with a lot of guilt as a result. Because of the choice she made, my brother has dreams of burning in hell. Sounds pretty severe, huh? That’s how the mind works sometimes. It can be your own worst enemy.OB1

Hi Ohbratti1,For some reason, reading that last post really struck me funny - and I know it's NOT funny but...My husband's name IS Charlie, so it really was a case of "well, sorry Charlie." I don't know why my sense of humor is screwed up today, but it just hit me as hilarious.On a side note, hope all is well with you!
cd

c.d.,
Hey how things going? Did you find it as amusing as I did that we are being told there is nothing that can be done about the unfair child support laws? HE HE HA HA HO HO HO!
with love flowerseed

Hey flowerseed,
Things are going lousy, but thanks for asking [img]images/icons/smile.gif" border="0[/img] As to child support, I think everybody is missing the *real* crime in the cs laws - which is the bias against fathers in the family courts. If fathers were, by law, AUTOMATICALLY awarded joint and equal custody rights, cs would be practically unnecessary (b/c each parent theoretically would be providing 50% of the support of the child) and I'll bet a lot less ow would get pregnant, purposefully or not, once the issues of money and "control" were no longer on the table.More later,
-cd

OhNo, I live in Minnesota. [img]images/icons/rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img]

Hiya Nosetta!Things are going pretty well. Keeping my eyes forward. When I wrote the “sorry, Charlie” sentence my immediate thought was of Charlie the Tuna and it just rolled from there. You’re not the only one who’s a little warped.
[img]images/icons/wink.gif" border="0[/img] And as far as changing unfair child support laws...as long as there is life, there WILL be change. It's inevitable.Take care!OB1

<blockquote>quote:<hr> And as far as changing unfair child support laws...as long as there is life, there WILL be change. It's inevitable. <hr></blockquote>Yes CS & custody laws will change... it just takes time. Just like slavery, voting, etc. they will change. There just has to be a movement.Unfortunately the image of the "dead beat dad" is so ingrained in american society (and many posters here and abroad) that they cannont focus on any other solution other than : you play you pay.z.

c.d.,
Wish there was something we could do to help you guys.
About the child support issue there was a poster saying that we can do nothing about it. I was just being a wee bit sarcastic since we both know there is. It was in another thread opps! Carrie,
This seems to be the mentality of people they hire for these positions. I live in a different state but this worker sounds like the ones I have delt with. I often wondered if they don't have their own agendas when dealing with these issues. I think I got my
answer. with love,
flowerseed

obratti, I respect your opinions, etc. But your last post makes the argument. You state that if the MM wishes to have child but OW does not, you believe the OW should have child, give child to MM, and pay Cs. again, the OW has the choice. If OW wants child, and MM does not, the MM not only pays CS but also , in most cases, fights with OW about whether he is involved with OC beyong financial support.He again does not have choices. Unlike OW. Is this not fair?
For the record, I waited a long time to have children. I was married a long time before I had kids. IN the interim, while building a career, getting established, going to school, my H and I did not want kids. IN particular, I was not sure I ever wanted kids. My H knew how I felt. But guess who was absolutely sure about the use of BC to prevent pregnancy? Me--not my h, but me. Because I knew I was the one who would pay the price if I became pregnant. I would, not H. In the affair, my OW did not use BC, and I believe wanted a child at any costs. Was delighted with pregnancy. The costs included costs to me and my innocent children-people she cares not about. ONly about having the child. Had I gotten pregnant before I was ready, I would have chosen abortion, as difficult a choice that would have been.Adoption, for those of you not willing to do that, is also an adoption, and in many cases better for OC. Why should OC grow up knowing he/she is product of an illicit affair? Is that good for the child as well?
I know you, OBratti, seem to be able to financially and emotionall support your little guy.Good for you. But that is not true for many of the OW on this board, and certainly not true in my case. If you cannot do this independently, I don't think this is a good option for the OC, nor OW. And certainly not for MM and his family. Just my humble opinion. And no, I don't think the laws concerning this is fair. In my marriage, we decided jointly when children were wanted, not railroaded into it by one partner's choice. THat is how it should be with a child born out of an affair, JMHO.

Flowerseed: Oh I know, I know, I know - the stories I could tell, but totally unrelated to the subject of this forum. Luckily, I have not had to deal with anyone like this having to do with this.

unhappy wife,“…if the MM wishes to have child but OW does not, you believe the OW should have child, give child to MM, and pay Cs. again, the OW has the choice…”I’m putting thought into that statement, but I’m a bit confused. If the woman gets pregnant and doesn’t want to have the child, but the man does, and, as a result, the woman must carry the child to term so the father can be the custodial parent….I don’t see where the woman made the choice. In this particular scenario it’s not about OW/MM. It’s about any woman and any man. My brother wanted the child his GF was pregnant with. She did not. She felt she was too young. She wanted to enjoy her life sans children for a little while longer. If, in my ideal world, my brother had the right to choose, his GF would have had to carry the baby to term and then give primary custody over to my brother so that she could forego the day to day responsibilities of a full time parent. She would have to pay CS. It wouldn’t be her choice, but it would be her legal obligation. If left to her and her alone, she would not have the child and she would avoid the financial obligation, but, then again, she should not have gotten herself into the situation to begin with. I don’t know if this cleared up my POV or muddled it even more.As for having a child without the resources to care for him/her, I do agree that is wrong, regardless of how the child came to be. It’s grossly negligent. I am grateful that I am in the position to care for my son. If I had not been, then I would have looked at adoption much more closely. There is so much a child/baby needs. Loving and wanting your baby is all well and good, but if you cannot provide for him, then you’re setting him up for failure. There are too many mothers who pop out babies without any thought to HOW they will support them. They wanted their baby. They loved their baby. They did not have the finances to support their baby. I’ve seen homes with babies who do not even have the basics i.e. sufficient supply of diapers, formula, appropriate clothing, etc. These little ones will usually end up being removed from the home and placed into foster care. Mom will be given time to “get her act together”. If she does and proves it to the state, she will go through the process of getting her baby back. If she does not, maybe baby can be adopted out, but usually will stay in foster care. These children get so caught up in the system that they are known as the “throwaways”. It’s heartbreaking to see. With these cases, I don’t doubt the mom’s loved their child, BUT they did not take into account that their love was not enough to sustain that child. Through their blind insistence to keep their baby, they caused him more harm.

Here is one injustice which I will never understand in the child support system. Why is a woman rewarded more money if she has multiple fathers?? Why shouldn't a woman who could have been screwed over by her husband get the same rights as the OW??See I don't understand how the system swears they protect the children, it is all for the children. But I see it is for the other children. See the OW in my situation had two "accident" drunken one night stands. She receives 40%. But the law states that if I were to get divorced I would only get 25% for my two children. The reason, because the first child costs more, each additional child costs less. Isn't that true for illegitmate children too? So if things were fair they would adjust the total money to the OW to 25% total, and split the amount between the two men. But the system makes it very clear if you try to have a marriage and raise your children in a marriage, they will never be as important as the woman who just gets pregnant outside of a marriage. On another note, how are there so many dead beat dads? I know for a fact they get my husband's money directly out of his check. He couldn't be a dead beat if he wanted to. Well only if we went underground and changed our identities. They never think of how it affected our family or asked about my children, they only cared about taking it out. So all those dead beat dads must not have jobs, cause if you have a job, the child support system can be worse than the IRS, no breathing room. babstr.

Hello Everyone,Can a guy who has never been in this situation from either side get into this very interesting discussion??? Thanks!First, I would like to take sides. I really like Jtigger's thinking.Second, I also agree with ohbratti.So having taken that very clear and staunch stance on the issue, [img]images/icons/grin.gif" border="0[/img] I would like to say that CDC had probable the closest approach that I, as a male with children, would agree with. You can never equalize the reproductive process. You can by law "balance/bias" it anyway you want.You may not recall this but up until the middle of the 20th century the men got the children in a divorce. You may also not realize that women had the vote in many states BEFORE the amendment to the US Constitution took place. Since not ALL states permited women to vote, they couldn't vote on national elections. However, when women did get the vote, the voting patterns with respect to candidates didn't change. (My guess is the women were telling their H's how to vote before, hence no change in the patterns. [img]images/icons/wink.gif" border="0[/img] )Why this rather strange history lession??? It seems to me that there is no way to make this issue "air tight" fair or balanced. Further, people adjust to whatever system is in place. Finally, things are not as clear as we would like them when discussing such issues. I don't care what side you are on. What one can do is take more and important factors into the equation. Personally, as a male, I think that custody of children should be shared by parents except in very unusual situations. I suspect you know what those might be. CDcollins suggest that point.This has nothing to do with the reproductive process, but has everything to do with rearing children. The justation (sp?) period is 9 months, the raising of a child takes AT LEAST 18 years. So balance that.I think that CS support should take into consideration how many children are being supported. If a man has three children and then helps create an OC, then all 4 children should be considered into the equation.Personally, I like Ohbratti's idea about the life of the child. If one of the parents wants the child to live then it ought to be alive barring health and life issues of the mother. This is apart from any discussion of the morals of abortion.Finally, there is only one place where equality truely exists in the creation of a child and that is the initial process alone. Although, even now men are being sued for support that donate sperm to a sperm bank, boys (13) are being sued for paternity although they were statatorially raped (yup happened here where I live), and even stranger children are being produced from DEAD MEN's sperm. So maybe I am wrong even here. Maybe the initial creation isn't equal.Well, I have said my piece. I apologize for interrupting. The sad and hard part for me reading this is that all sides have points. I would just like to see more focus on the years of the child and more balance brought there. I think that balance in child custody would probably slow down the divorce process in this country as well as make people think a bit harder before the whole process begins.I suspect that it would make men think a lot more if he KNEW that he would have any child to care for at least half of the time, no matter what happened. I am surprised that it doesn't seem to make women think more as well. I guess I am just naive.Thanks and God Bless,JL

<<On another note, how are there so many dead beat dads? I know for a fact they get my husband's money directly out of his check. He couldn't be a dead beat if he wanted to. >>That's a good question Babstr and one I keep asking myself...it took the good old state of TX almost five years to garnish my ex-hubby for a mere $200 a month....I don't have the money to take my ex- back to court and since I moved to another state, I have to pay to transfer records etc. and have LA take up jurisdiction....The money that was alloted to go after my ex (who was a legitimate hubby and co-creator) had to go to pay for my H's atty. and the things with OW.my dream is to try to settle out of court with my ex (who claims he has no money...I'm sure he hides it in his wife's name...I know....I know...we do it to protect ourselves and they do it to cheat us...I'm in a middle position here as I see BOTH sides...I know......ugh) anyway...my dream is to settle out of court where he pays a percentage of medical costs (owed me since 08/96) and half of my bi-polar cub's meds and $400 a month ($200 per child...we have two daughters together) to offset the $400 we shell out to OW for one child!!!! I don't understand this system too...apparently I should have had Louisiana go after my ex instead of TX....ugh.......Good question though...TwiistyIncidentally, my ex has a very good job and works for the Government as a Forest Ranger/Manager at a state park. He tells me he can't afford to pay more...guess I'll have to scrimp and save again to hire an atty to see if LA can get it from him after all...then at least my H and I will break even....*sigh*