U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-13-2014, 09:09 PM
 
223 posts, read 233,587 times
Reputation: 232

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by GotHereQuickAsICould View Post
I wouldn't worry too much child support payments making a big difference on the FAFSA as I doubt he will be sticking with this job for long. Anyone who has skipped out on supporting his kids for a decade under the impression that once they are 18 he is home free is likely to do it again.

Plus, as I recall, FAFSA application had to include the income of both parents. So what was added to hers would be deducted from his and it's a wash.
This isn't quite true. My parents are divorced. When I was filling out FAFSA for college, I had to report the custodial parent's income (my mom's) which included the child support my dad paid, but I didn't have to report my dad's income.

Quote:
He will never be able to get a passport or collect his social security retirement until this debt is paid. He will also have his income tax withheld if he even bothers to file.
This is true... some states, like NJ, will take your state refund & send it to child support if you are in arrears. It's ugly, but a deadbeat dad working under the table probably isn't bothering to file state income tax returns.

My dad went to court when I was 22 and my brother was 21 to get us emancipated. I was already out of college so per my parents' divorce decree, I was no longer entitled to support (once we got to college, my mom would give us the $ to use toward school expenses, like tuition). My brother still had 2 years of college left, but he went to a school that had a co-op program that allowed him to work at a decent-paying job 6 months out of the year. He was actually making more $ than my dad, so my mom didn't contest my dad filing to terminate future support for my brother, which was granted by the court. More than once, though, my dad had his income tax refunds sent to my mom because he had fallen behind on his payments.

OP, I don't think your friend should waive the ex's obligation to pay back child support. She & the kids deserve it, no question. Good luck to your friend.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-13-2014, 10:42 PM
 
2,694 posts, read 3,905,902 times
Reputation: 6282
Quote:
Originally Posted by pookybean View Post
my ex owes over $20k in arrears. once my son turned 18 he thought the support would end as well and went out and got a new "real" job and took me to court for support to be terminated. turns out that since my son is in college he has to pay until he turns 23 or finishes a ba degree, which ever is first. i had to forward verification of enrollment to the court, they gave me 10 days. by the time i sent it (within the 10 days) and they asked my ex for updated pay stubs, he was all of a sudden making less money again. that's fine, he is still paying current support and money towards the arrears. I may get only $100 every 2 weeks, but he will be paying it forever. he will also never be able to obtain a passport, purchase a house without satisfying a judgement or hold a professional license (plus lots of other penalties). i often wonder is not supporting his child really worth the cost of all that? seems like a stagnant sort of life to me. he is also married and has 2 other children with her.

i won't release him from paying those arrears. i won't go back to court and try to increase support either...but as long as he is working and the dor sends me that payment i will gladly accept it. he owes it, just like any other debt. he would likely be almost done paying if he did what he should have for the past 18 years.
Good for you pookybean! I am glad you are standing up for yourself and making him pay his debts. I am amazed how many deadbeat parents there are out there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2014, 11:00 PM
 
3,279 posts, read 3,781,580 times
Reputation: 6149
To me, the child support system isn't just about "deadbeats," it is, in some cases, about showing no respect for a parent's rights but sure as heck bugging them about their responsibilities--basically treating them as nothing more than an ATM machine.

To me, child support and visitation rights should be linked.

That is to say--if a dad loves his children, but the wife leaves him, takes the kids, is awarded sole custody, doesn't allow any visits, she has NO BUSINESS demanding his money, zero, zilch. No way should a parent, mother or father, be required to pay tons of money to a child they aren't even allowed to see. If you are going to bang the drum about their legal responsibilities, then equal treatment and focus should be applied with respect to their rights of visitation.

I have seen and heard of MANY scenarios like this, where parents split up, or where two people create a child out of wedlock and the father, wanting to see his child and have a relationship, is denied this, only to have the mother come screaming for child support for this supposedly "deadbeat" dad. Also, the amounts they expect can be ENORMOUS. I know of people on freaking minimum wage jobs being expected to pay $350-400 a month, and on a minimum wage salary that is ENORMOUS. They end up practically homeless because they can't even afford to take care of themselves because of this, yet they want to see their children and love them, but are denied.

In other words, we sure bang the drum hard and loud about how "you're the father, it's your responsibility" with respect to support, but don't care so much about how "you're the father, it's your RIGHT to see your children." To me, that's just plain wrong most times. To me, they go hand-in-hand--the law may say otherwise, but then the law is WRONG.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2014, 11:25 PM
 
Location: Wisconsin
16,529 posts, read 16,041,860 times
Reputation: 39014
Quote:
Originally Posted by shyguylh View Post
To me, the child support system isn't just about "deadbeats," it is, in some cases, about showing no respect for a parent's rights but sure as heck bugging them about their responsibilities--basically treating them as nothing more than an ATM machine.

To me, child support and visitation rights should be linked.

That is to say--if a dad loves his children, but the wife leaves him, takes the kids, is awarded sole custody, doesn't allow any visits, she has NO BUSINESS demanding his money, zero, zilch. No way should a parent, mother or father, be required to pay tons of money to a child they aren't even allowed to see. If you are going to bang the drum about their legal responsibilities, then equal treatment and focus should be applied with respect to their rights of visitation.

I have seen and heard of MANY scenarios like this, where parents split up, or where two people create a child out of wedlock and the father, wanting to see his child and have a relationship, is denied this, only to have the mother come screaming for child support for this supposedly "deadbeat" dad. Also, the amounts they expect can be ENORMOUS. I know of people on freaking minimum wage jobs being expected to pay $350-400 a month, and on a minimum wage salary that is ENORMOUS. They end up practically homeless because they can't even afford to take care of themselves because of this, yet they want to see their children and love them, but are denied.

In other words, we sure bang the drum hard and loud about how "you're the father, it's your responsibility" with respect to support, but don't care so much about how "you're the father, it's your RIGHT to see your children." To me, that's just plain wrong most times. To me, they go hand-in-hand--the law may say otherwise, but then the law is WRONG.
In my state, the non custodial parent pays 17% of their income in child support. It can also be reduced in "low income situations". Frankly, 17% does not sound like an "ENORMOUS" amount.

In my state, even a parent with 5 or more children would only pay 34% of their income (plus it can be reduced in "low income situations"). Perhaps, the non custodial parent should have considered some job training so they were not only capable of making minimum wage before deciding to have 5 or more children and thus being required to pay $350 or $400 a month in support.

BTW, how far is that even going to go in supporting 5 or more children? Can you imagine trying to even feed, let alone cloth, or pay for day care, or pay for other expenses for 5 or more children on that amount of money?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2014, 11:53 PM
 
43,012 posts, read 89,260,654 times
Reputation: 30265
Quote:
Originally Posted by germaine2626 View Post
BTW, how far is that even going to go in supporting 5 or more children? Can you imagine trying to even feed, let alone cloth, or pay for day care, or pay for other expenses for 5 or more children on that amount of money?
It makes me sick when custodial parents say this. My girlfriend used to say it all the time about her child support, which was pretty substantial. The noncustodial parent's child support is not intended to fully support the children. BOTH parents are supposed to be supporting the children.

Quote:
Originally Posted by germaine2626 View Post
Perhaps, the non custodial parent should have considered some job training so they were not only capable of making minimum wage before deciding to have 5 or more children.
Just as you say a noncustodial parent should have receive training before having those children, the custodial parent should have taken that into consideration too since they were partners when the children were conceived.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2014, 11:58 PM
 
2,694 posts, read 3,905,902 times
Reputation: 6282
Quote:
Originally Posted by shyguylh View Post
To me, the child support system isn't just about "deadbeats," it is, in some cases, about showing no respect for a parent's rights but sure as heck bugging them about their responsibilities--basically treating them as nothing more than an ATM machine.

To me, child support and visitation rights should be linked.

That is to say--if a dad loves his children, but the wife leaves him, takes the kids, is awarded sole custody, doesn't allow any visits, she has NO BUSINESS demanding his money, zero, zilch. No way should a parent, mother or father, be required to pay tons of money to a child they aren't even allowed to see. If you are going to bang the drum about their legal responsibilities, then equal treatment and focus should be applied with respect to their rights of visitation.

I have seen and heard of MANY scenarios like this, where parents split up, or where two people create a child out of wedlock and the father, wanting to see his child and have a relationship, is denied this, only to have the mother come screaming for child support for this supposedly "deadbeat" dad. Also, the amounts they expect can be ENORMOUS. I know of people on freaking minimum wage jobs being expected to pay $350-400 a month, and on a minimum wage salary that is ENORMOUS. They end up practically homeless because they can't even afford to take care of themselves because of this, yet they want to see their children and love them, but are denied.

In other words, we sure bang the drum hard and loud about how "you're the father, it's your responsibility" with respect to support, but don't care so much about how "you're the father, it's your RIGHT to see your children." To me, that's just plain wrong most times. To me, they go hand-in-hand--the law may say otherwise, but then the law is WRONG.

I rarely hear of parents denying the other parent access to the children (unless there are drugs or some other addiction involved). Unless the parent fears for the childs safety that is wrong.

In my friends case I know she encouraged her ex to see the kids. He moved out of state and it was his choice to see the kids only once or twice a year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2014, 08:37 AM
 
3,493 posts, read 4,724,728 times
Reputation: 5358
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSD610 View Post
I think if she wants to sign the waiver then it is absolutely her right to sign the waiver without any grief from anyone else.
If it were me I would take him to court and request that the back support to split evenly and sent to the children each month but since it isn't me.
It is her life, her decision and her choice to make alone without any input from anyone else.
It is entirely her decision, so long as she does not ask for my money down the road. If she asks for a government handout that must be financed through taxes that would be foisted upon me, I have the right to tell her "hell no, you gave away your retirement to a deadbeat". That deadbeat effectively took the money she had a right to. If she is allowing him to keep it, she shouldn't ask for me, or any other tax payer, to provide for her so she can afford to live with allowing him to rob her blind. I think it would be a bad choice for her to let him keep it, but it is her right. It would be unethical for her to give it to him and then ask for someone else to pay for her.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2014, 09:02 AM
 
2,694 posts, read 3,905,902 times
Reputation: 6282
Quote:
Originally Posted by lurtsman View Post
It is entirely her decision, so long as she does not ask for my money down the road. If she asks for a government handout that must be financed through taxes that would be foisted upon me, I have the right to tell her "hell no, you gave away your retirement to a deadbeat". That deadbeat effectively took the money she had a right to. If she is allowing him to keep it, she shouldn't ask for me, or any other tax payer, to provide for her so she can afford to live with allowing him to rob her blind. I think it would be a bad choice for her to let him keep it, but it is her right. It would be unethical for her to give it to him and then ask for someone else to pay for her.
Never thought of it that way lurtsman. How is anyone to know they won't have some major catastrophe and eventually rely on government assistance?

Another reason for her not to waive arrears.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2014, 09:03 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
16,529 posts, read 16,041,860 times
Reputation: 39014
Quote:
Originally Posted by germaine2626 View Post
In my state, the non custodial parent pays 17% of their income in child support. It can also be reduced in "low income situations". Frankly, 17% does not sound like an "ENORMOUS" amount.

In my state, even a parent with 5 or more children would only pay 34% of their income (plus it can be reduced in "low income situations"). Perhaps, the non custodial parent should have considered some job training so they were not only capable of making minimum wage before deciding to have 5 or more children and thus being required to pay $350 or $400 a month in support.

BTW, how far is that even going to go in supporting 5 or more children? Can you imagine trying to even feed, let alone cloth, or pay for day care, or pay for other expenses for 5 or more children on that amount of money?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hopes View Post
It makes me sick when custodial parents say this. My girlfriend used to say it all the time about her child support, which was pretty substantial. The noncustodial parent's child support is not intended to fully support the children. BOTH parents are supposed to be supporting the children.


Just as you say a noncustodial parent should have receive training before having those children, the custodial parent should have taken that into consideration too since they were partners when the children were conceived.
Of course, both parents need to support their children.

My point was that when you consider ALL the expenses of (my example of 5 children) $350 or $400 does not go very far (the other poster was referring to that as an ENORMOUS amount of money paid in child support for someone making minimum wage -in my state that would be what someone supporting 5 or more children would be paying) . Food, Clothing, Day Care expenses are just the beginning. Housing, utilities, school expenses.

Heck, in my area $350 to $400 will only pay for one to one and a half weeks of child care for just one child. I wonder who would be expected to pay for the other two and half or three weeks of day for that one child, let alone the four other children in my example and all of the other expenses of the five children.

Hopes, I am sorry that your girlfriend was/is trying to take advantage of you. However, in the experiences of my friends and coworkers close to 100% of the time it was the ex-wife or ex-girlfriend and the children who were the being screwed after the divorce or breakup.

Good point, both parents should have considered how much it would cost to support their children before they decided to have those children and "minimum wage skills" is not enough.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2014, 09:32 AM
 
43,012 posts, read 89,260,654 times
Reputation: 30265
Quote:
Originally Posted by germaine2626;
Hopes, I am sorry that your girlfriend was/is trying to take advantage of you. However, in the experiences of my friends and coworkers close to 100% of the time it was the ex-wife or ex-girlfriend and the children who were the being screwed after the divorce or breakup.
I'm a female. My girlfriend was just that---a girlfriend. Not a romantic relationship.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top