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.
We lived it so I'm not sure why you think it's false. The police weren't involved and it took about 6 months from the time we contacted Legal Aide till my son was allowed his first visit with the daughter he hadn't seen in about 2 years. Why you would accuse a poster of lying when you not absolutely NOTHING about them is puzzling.
I said they were claiming a falsehood, and they were. It had nothing to do with their personal situation.
Let me ask you a question:
What would have happened if your son's mother simply ignored the court order? What if your son showed up to pick up his daughter, and your son's mother wasn't home? What then?
The mistake that you are making with a lot of others is to make the assumption that all custodial parents follow court orders. They don't. Some go years without following court ordered parenting time, and nothing happens to them whatsoever.
The ex told the judge at the first visit that she wasn't going to follow the court order. The judge told her in no uncertain terms that she would be arrested for violating a court order. She changed her tune quick enough as she already had a felony in her past.
The funny thing is once my son had access to his daughter the ex was plenty happy not having her around especially since she was using drugs and was a terrible mother and my granddaughter had a terrible stepfather who is now in jail for 5 years for selling drugs.
In other words your ex daughter in law does NOT financially support her children. The courts don't require her to do so, and the worst part is that you ok with this.
She buys them clothing, food and provides them with housing. Exactly how is that not supporting them financially? Why does the fact that she stays home because of her autistic child, goes to all his ARD meetings, gets him evaluated for his therapies, etc. mean she is not supporting him. Why does the fact that she doesn't work a job mean she is not supporting him when she has inherited wealth? That is still her money that she is using to support them.
Once again, if you are married and your wife stays at home to take care of the kids is she not supporting them? The finances are different, but she is still supporting them.
Why is it that custodial parents that don't financially support their children are not called deadbeats as well?
Why don't custodial parents have a legal obligation to financially support their children if its so important?
Of course financial support is important. How does a good custodial parent not financially support their child? I don't know anyone that receives enough money in child support to pay all of the household and personal bills.
The custodial parent also emotionally supports the child - day in and day out. That is not true of the non custodial parent that sees the child 4 or 5 days a month.
Maybe you have an ex that refuses to work outside of the home and that has you bitter?
A good parent will do what is best for the child - period. That means paying child support, being there physically and emotionally for your child and looking out for your child's best interest.
The custodial parent also emotionally supports the child - day in and day out. That is not true of the non custodial parent that sees the child 4 or 5 days a month.
Perhaps the non custodial parent would love to see the kid more than a few days a month but is not allowed to. You can't fault a person for not being there to emotionally support a child when they have no legal way to do so. You've actually stumbled on to one of the main reasons that 50/50 custody should be considered the norm whenever possible.
Perhaps the non custodial parent would love to see the kid more than a few days a month but is not allowed to. You can't fault a person for not being there to emotionally support a child when they have no legal way to do so. You've actually stumbled on to one of the main reasons that 50/50 custody should be considered the norm whenever possible.
While I agree that 50/50 custody should be the norm when possible, it is often not possible.
1. The non-custodial parent may be working many hours.
2. The non-custodial parent may not be close enough physically to have that kind of custody once the child is in school.
3. Moving from house to house is often quite difficult for a small child.
We are fortunate because mom and dad live in the same subdivision in separate houses. The kids can walk from house to house. Dad travels for work though, so sometimes he is unavailable - the kids are able to be with the grandparents on dad's side, but that is not the same as being with dad. Most of the time, the 50/50 arrangement does work for us and for the kids, but there are some circumstances where it would not. For example, my ds works for a company that might transfer him out of the area due to the economic problems they are having right now. So far, they are saying his job will stay here, but it could move out of state at some point. If his ex-wife would move to that city and state, it could continue to work, but it is not likely that she would want to move since she has built her support system here.
It is very disheartening to see someone like you be so committed to sharing information with others that is totally untrue and false. The courts in a general sense may claim to presume as you say, but the proof is in the pudding, as they say. In many places every other weekend parenting time is SOP, which effectively removes one parent from the lives of their children.
As to the bolded, this couldn't be more untrue. You see, it's a fine distinction. The court may 'easily' order parenting time, but if the custodial parent violates the court order, what is the remedy for the non custodial parent? The answer is a contempt filing, which costs big money, takes a long time, and tends to be ineffective. The problem writ large is that Judges don't do anything to custodial parents when they violate court orders. Yet if a non custodial parent can't pay 50% of their paycheck, they go to jail. It amazes me that anyone would defend this. Some states are better than others, but your overall claim is simply not true. Anyone that has spent any time at all in family court knows this. Here is a good book that demonstrates this. realworlddivorce.com
What did I say that was untrue? My son has full custody of his son. The judge initially gave him shared custody but his ex was irresponsible and my son was diligent about keeping records of her 'lifestyle'. He went back to court and got full custody. He proved that she didn't have a verifiable address, and he looked at public court records and found that she had been cited for driving without a license and for the kid riding in the front seat with no car seat or seat belt.
If a custodial parent violates a custody order you go back to court and file a contempt charge, you can find the form and instructions on line. You can do a contempt filing yourself, or hire a paralegal it does not cost "big money" Keep records of visitation! Have the exchange take place through a third party who can verify any occasions where the custodial parent is late or doesn't show up when you establish a pattern of the custodial parent not allowing you to see the child you have a good chance that the judge will find that the custodial parent is attempting to alienate the child from you and in most states that is cause for the court to grant you full custody.
It's very unusual for a non custodial parent to pay 50% of their net income in support. If the children are in school it's easy to get the judge to impute income for the custodial parent and adjust child support based on that, there is a presumption that a parent with school age children can work and their income will serve to reduce your support obligation.
While I agree that 50/50 custody should be the norm when possible, it is often not possible.
1. The non-custodial parent may be working many hours.
2. The non-custodial parent may not be close enough physically to have that kind of custody once the child is in school.
3. Moving from house to house is often quite difficult for a small child.
I'm not talking about your or anyone's specific circumstances, I am speaking generally. I also know it's not always possible. If we start at 50/50 as the base point and move from there as circumstances dictate you will end up with more equitable results for all involved than you would if you started from a point of a custodial mother and part time father and only deviated from that under extenuating circumstances that the part time father would have to spend tens of thousands of dollars to convince a judge were real circumstances and not just a cynical attempt to dodge a high child support payment. Sorry for the run on sentence.
I'm not talking about your or anyone's specific circumstances, I am speaking generally. I also know it's not always possible. If we start at 50/50 as the base point and move from there as circumstances dictate you will end up with more equitable results for all involved than you would if you started from a point of a custodial mother and part time father and only deviated from that under extenuating circumstances that the part time father would have to spend tens of thousands of dollars to convince a judge were real circumstances and not just a cynical attempt to dodge a high child support payment. Sorry for the run on sentence.
The ex told the judge at the first visit that she wasn't going to follow the court order. The judge told her in no uncertain terms that she would be arrested for violating a court order. She changed her tune quick enough as she already had a felony in her past.
The funny thing is once my son had access to his daughter the ex was plenty happy not having her around especially since she was using drugs and was a terrible mother and my granddaughter had a terrible stepfather who is now in jail for 5 years for selling drugs.
First of all your son was very, very lucky that she did all of these stupid things.
But just so you know, the police would not arrest her if she kept the children from your son. If she did so and continued to do so your son would be in the exact same position that thousands of men all around the country find themselves in- barred from their children's lives with no remedy.
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.
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.
